A recent editorial by Christophe Bernard, editor in chief of eNeuro, keeps alive the discussion about ways to improve peer review.
Endorsement of our work by competent peers aids in improving its quality and scientific rigor. However, a perfect peer-review system has yet to be achieved and the process still remains a multifaceted issue in scientific publication. Gender and career stage may represent a significant factor adding to the potential bias of our peers when evaluating our work. Personally, I have no problems in receiving tough comments, as long as they are constructive, because they