. G. Soon and E. Lim, Preprint servers: a new model for scholarly publishing? Australian Academic & Research Libraries 21-30. and Weeks The chemistry preprint server: an experiment in scientific communication, Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, pp.765-766, 1996.

J. Hunter, Post-Publication Peer Review: Opening Up Scientific Conversation, Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, vol.6, issue.5, 2012.
DOI : 10.3389/fncom.2012.00063
URL : http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fncom.2012.00063/pdf

J. Priem, H. A. Piwowar, and B. M. Hemminger, Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore 6, 2012.

D. Pontille and D. Torny, Beyond Fact Checking: Reconsidering the Status of Truth of Published Articles, EASST Review, vol.36, issue.1, 2017.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01576348

D. M. Herron, Is expert peer review obsolete? A model suggests that post-publication reader review 8, 2012.
DOI : 10.1007/s00464-012-2171-1

D. Pontille and D. Torny, From Manuscript Evaluation to Article Valuation: The Changing Technologies of Journal Peer Review, Human Studies, vol.9, issue.1, pp.57-79, 2015.
DOI : 10.1007/BF01553188
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01143310

S. Greaves, J. Scott, M. Clarke, L. Miller, T. Hannay et al., Nature's trial of 10 open peer review, Nature, issue.971, pp.444-454, 2006.

E. Adie, Commenting on scientific articles writing in the Nascent blog02/commenting_on_scientific_artic.html PubMed Commons to be Discontinued https://ncbiinsights.ncbi.nlm.nih.govpubmed-commons- 12 to-be-discontinued/ , 1st February 2018. Only 1410 commentators used it between 2014 and 2016 according to, PubMed Commons, International congress on peer review and scientific publication, pp.17-0269, 2009.

M. Linzer, The journal club and medical education: over one hundred years of unrecorded history., Postgraduate Medical Journal, vol.63, issue.740, 1987.
DOI : 10.1136/pgmj.63.740.475

P. C. Alguire, A review of journal clubs in postgraduate medical education, Journal of General Internal Medicine, vol.277, issue.5, 1998.
DOI : 10.1001/jama.1997.03540460066034

. Blog, Vigilant scientists, https://blog.pubpeer.com, p.20, 2013.

B. Stell and I. , meet-pubpeer-2-0-new-version-post- 22 publication-peer-review-site-launches-today/, 2017. https://pubpeer.com/publications/0E0DAEBEC6183646F18F4FAED03B1A 23 https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/should-post-publication-peer-review-be-anonymous and 24 https

W. J. Parak, W. C. Chan, J. H. Hafner, P. T. Hammond, M. C. Hersam et al., Be critical but fair The PubPeer FAQ develop this point by answering the two questions : " Did someone just accuse me of 27 fraud? " and " Is someone out to get me, J. ACS Nano, vol.26, issue.710, 2013.

D. Pontille and D. Torny, The Blind Shall See! The Question of Anonymity in Journal Peer Review, Ada, issue.4, 2014.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00981277
DOI : 10.7264/N3542KVW

W. Broad and N. Wade, Betrayers of the Truth. Fraud and Deceit in the Hall of Science, 1982.

S. Simon, A crisis of trust, https://blog.pubpeer.com/publications

F. Chateauraynaud and D. Torny, Mobilising around a risk: from alarm raisers to alarm carriers, Cécile Lahellec. Risques et crises alimentaires, Lavoisier/Tec & Doc, p.329-339, 2005.
URL : https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00411847

. G. As-they-repeatedly-wrote-e, Our own experience suggests that strong anonymity is the key to encouraging 40 useful comments, as do the failed experiments with journal-run commenting systems. We suspect that PubMed will eventually come to the same conclusion, 2013.

M. R. Blatt, Vigilante Science at PubPeer. Plant physiology 169, pp.907-909, 2015.
DOI : 10.1104/pp.15.01443
URL : http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/plantphysiol/169/2/907.full.pdf