The platforms work through a tag system evaluated through the Dialogic Open Review. Science is making the step from blind peer review to open peer review, which means that in the process of publication or after publishing it, each article can be reviewed by any scientist in the field. Dialogic Open Review is one step forward because the publication is revised by any citizens providing scientific valid arguments. This implies that anyone can register and publish a post on the platform.
Each new post will remain open for 15 days so that anyone can contribute with arguments that confirm or refute it. These arguments can be scientific evidence (from Scopus or Web Of Science scientific articles) or everyday life experiences. After 14 days, the platform will evaluate the evidence provided and assign a category based on the presence of scientific articles from Scopus or Web Of Science. However, even if a category has been assigned, the post is still open to all citizens to provide new evidence as knowledge advances. Thus, if the science has advanced and new evidence has been provided that confirms or refutes the assertion of the post, the assigned category is re-evaluated, changing it if necessary.
There are five categories where you can find the posts:
- Under Review: All posts undergo an initial 15-day review before being classified into another category. During this period, scientific evidence can be added to contribute to the classification of the post into one of the categories. Once this review period is completed, the post falls into one of the following categories: scientific evidence, hoax, needs more evidence, or scientific controversy. However, even after the post has been classified, additional evidence can still be added.
- Scientific Evidence: Posts labeled as Scientific Evidence contain at least evidence from three scientific articles (published in journals indexed in Web Of Science or Scopus) that support the claim and are representative of the topic.
- Hoax: Posts labeled as Hoax contain at least evidence from three scientific articles (published in journals indexed in Web Of Science/Scopus) that refute the claim and are representative of the topic.
- Needs more Evidence: There is not enough scientific evidence (less than three scientific articles supporting the claim) to classify the post into the Hoax or Scientific Evidence categories.
- Scientific Controversy: There is no scientific consensus regarding the claim made in the post.