Can an Overwhelmed Peer-Review System Endure the AI Era?

Health economist Jason Semprini studied policies requiring elementary school students to receive the HPV vaccine and found that, despite HPV causing most cervical cancers, such mandates do little to reduce population-wide cervical cancer rates—partly because they can motivate some people to avoid vaccination. When he submitted the manuscript to a journal, a peer reviewer misunderstood the central point, thinking Semprini was questioning the vaccine itself rather than the policy's effectiveness. Semprini, of Des Moines University, called the distinction “very big.” Peer review, traditionally anonymous and volunteer-based, is increasingly strained, and the episode raises broader questions about whether it can survive the AI era.