 Hi. My name is Alejandro León. Welcome to this presentation on Open Peer Review. In the academic world, peer review is a vital process for ensuring the quality and credibility of research. Today, we will be exploring Open Peer Review, what it is and how it differs from traditional peer review. Traditional peer review is a process where experts in the field are asked to evaluate the quality and accuracy of research before it is published. The process usually takes place anonymously, with reviewers to identify only by their initials or a code. While traditional peer review has been an essential process for ensuring the quality of research for many years, it has some limitations. Benefits of traditional peer review include that it provides an impartial and objective evaluation of research. It helps to identify potential flaws in the research, and it can help to improve the quality of research over time. Limitations of traditional peer review include that it can be slow and time-consuming. It may not identify all flaws in research, and it may be subject to biases or conflicts of interest. Open Peer Review is a process where reviewers' identities are disclosed to others, readers, and sometimes the wider community. Reviewers may be asked to sign the reviews, making them publicly available alongside the published article. This approach can help to increase transparency and accountability in the review process. Benefits of Open Peer Review include increased transparency and accountability, reduced potential for bias or conflicts of interest, and increased engagement and participation in the peer review process. Limitations of Open Peer Review include concerns about the potential for retaliation or harassment against reviewers, and the potential for reviewers to be influenced by public opinion. Signed reviews are similar to Open Peer Review, but they differ in that reviewers are identified only to the editor and others of the paper, rather than to the wider community. This approach can provide some of the benefits of Open Peer Review while reducing the risk of harassment or retaliation against reviewers. Benefits of signed reviews include increased accountability and transparency, while avoiding some of the risks associated with Open Peer Review. Limitations of signed reviews include that they may not be accessible to the wider research community, and may still be subject to conflicts of interest or biases. Several academic journals and publishers have adopted Open Peer Review, including the BMJ Open, F1000 Research, and PureJ. These journals provide various models of Open Peer Review, including signed reviews, public reviews, and pre-publication review. Open Peer Review has been successful in certain fields and contexts, for example, in some fields such as social science or humanities. It may be particularly useful to open up the review process to allow for constructive and critical feedback from a broader range of stakeholders. In addition, Open Peer Review can increase transparency, accountability, and trust in the peer review process. It can also help to promote collaboration and innovation among researchers. In conclusion, peer review is a viral process in the academic publishing world, and Open Peer Review is a promising approach that can increase transparency and accountability in the review process. While there are some concerns about the potential risk of Open Peer Review, it has shown success in certain contexts and can provide valuable feedback and insights to researchers. As researchers, we should continue to explore different models of peer review and evaluate their effectiveness in promoting high-quality research. Thank you for joining us today for this presentation on Open Peer Review. We hope you found information valuable and informative. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Thank you again for your time and attention.