How to find peer review feedback in journals?

Peer review feedback on journal submissions is typically confidential communication between reviewers, editors, and authors; it is not standard practice or readily available to the public. Direct access to the specific referee reports pertaining to a published article is generally not feasible due to the confidential nature of the traditional peer review process across most journals. The primary principle governing peer review feedback is confidentiality to protect reviewer anonymity and ensure candid assessments, thereby upholding the integrity and objectivity of the evaluation process. Necessary conditions for accessing feedback include explicit policies adopted by specific journals offering transparent peer review, the voluntary sharing by authors or reviewers, or rare situations involving publication ethics investigations. The scope of finding feedback is therefore severely limited unless disclosure mechanisms are formally in place; readers are advised against expecting public availability. Major caveats include respecting reviewer anonymity and journal confidentiality agreements. Actual steps for finding feedback are restricted and dependent on journal policies. If a journal operates an Open Peer Review model where reports are published alongside articles, these would be accessible on the article's online page. Authors themselves sometimes share excerpts in commentaries or supplementary materials. Examining manuscript revisions against the original submission sometimes reveals indirectly the nature of feedback received. Post-publication platforms like PubPeer may host independent critiques but not the original confidential reviews. Accessing original peer review documents typically requires specific consent and action from authors or editors.