Only one registration per PREreview Club is required. This person will serve as the main point of contact for Review-a-thon communications. They can be the Club lead or another designated Club member.

If more than one person from the same Club registers, we will only follow up with the person identified as the Club’s lead or representative.

To be eligible for the Review-a-thon raffle, your Club must publish at least one collaborative review on PREreview.org by October 2, 2026, two weeks after the end of Peer Review Week.

You will then have until October 9, 2026 to report your published collaborative PREreview(s). We also encourage you to optionally share a short reflection on your experience, and submit photos or screenshots from your Review-a-thon activities.

We will share the post-event reporting form with all Review-a-thon participating Clubs via their leads or representatives.

A collaborative review is structured feedback on a research output developed by two or more reviewers working together.

Your collaboration can happen through a live discussion or through an asynchronous exchange of ideas. The resulting review must be published on PREreview.org and signed by at least two co-authors.

Reviewers can sign reviews using their name or their unique PREreview pseudonym.

You can review any preprint or dataset from one of the servers and repositories supported by PREreview—you’ll find the full list on our website. Once you’ve chosen a research output, simply copy and paste its DOI into the review box on PREreview.org to get started.

If you’re looking for a preprint that would particularly benefit from open peer review, browse PREreview’s preprint review requests, where you can filter requests by language and research field. These requests are often submitted by authors actively seeking community feedback.

For datasets, you can also explore repositories such as Dryad and SciELO Data to find something relevant to your Club’s interests and expertise.

No. PREreview Clubs come in all shapes and sizes, and we encourage you to organize your Review-a-thon activity in the way that works best for your community.

Some Clubs are local and/or affiliation-based and meet in person. Others bring together people across countries and time zones. Your Club might hold a synchronous Live Review, collaborate asynchronously using a shared document, or develop another approach that fits your context.

What matters is that the review is genuinely collaborative and that everyone understands how they will participate and contribute.

Yes! If you’re organizing a synchronous discussion, you can use and adapt our Live Review templates. You can also consult the FORCE11 Club Review Roles document for ideas about distributing roles and responsibilities among participants.

These resources are starting points—feel free to adapt them to your Club’s needs and context.

All participants are expected to follow PREreview’s Code of Conduct throughout the Review-a-thon.

We also want the Review-a-thon to create space for human discussion, critical thinking, and transparent peer review. For this reason, reviews that use generative AI to produce narrative review points are not eligible for the raffle.

Please do! We’d love to see how different PREreview Clubs are participating.

If you share photos, reflections, or takeaways on social media, tag PREreview on LinkedIn, Bluesky, or Mastodon and consider using #ReviewAThon, #PeerReviewWeek, and #PRW26 to connect with other communities celebrating Peer Review Week around the world.