{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019417475728155338, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.164179104477612, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
EVIDENCE-BASED EDITING—AT LAST!

Editors and others are beginning to research the process of peer review. Most questions about the peer review process cannot yet be answered on the basis of evidence, but some can: for instance, we have evidence that blinding reviewers to the identity of authors leads them to produce better opinions and that structured abstracts contain more information than unstructured ones.