Correction: Characteristics of ‘mega’ peer-reviewers
Research Integrity and Peer Review volume 7, Article number: 5 (2022)
Correction to: Res Integr Peer Rev 7, 1 (2022)
Following publication of the original article , the authors identified an error in the ‘Results’, both in the Abstract and in the main text: it incorrectly stated that ‘a greater proportion of mega peer reviews were male (92%) as compared to the control reviewers (70% male)’, instead of 74% vs 58% as listed in the table.
In addition, ‘Web of Science’ needed to be changed to ‘Clarivate’ in the main text and the ‘Acknowledgements’ section.
The original article  has been corrected.
Rice, et al. Characteristics of ‘mega’ peer-reviewers. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2022;7:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-022-00121-1.
About this article
Cite this article
Rice, D.B., Pham, B., Presseau, J. et al. Correction: Characteristics of ‘mega’ peer-reviewers. Res Integr Peer Rev 7, 5 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-022-00124-y