01997nas a2200361   4500000000100000008004100001260001500042100001700057700001700074700002100091700001600112700001600128700001800144700001700162700001800179700002000197700002000217700001500237700002100252700001700273700001900290700001900309700001500328700001800343700002200361700001900383245003700402856005800439300000900497490000600506520110900512022001401621       2018                            d  c2018-10-171 aJeffrey Beck1 aKathryn Funk1 aMelissa Harrison1 aJo McEntyre1 aJosie Breen1 aAndy Collings1 aPaul Donohoe1 aMichael Evans1 aLouisa Flintoft1 aAudrey Hamelers1 aPhil Hurst1 aThomas Lemberger1 aJennifer Lin1 aNiamh O'Connor1 aMichael Parkin1 aSam Parker1 aPeter Rodgers1 aMagdalena Skipper1 aMichael Stoner00aPublishing peer review materials  uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6206614/  a16550 v73 aPublishing peer review materials alongside research articles promises to make the peer review process more transparent as well as making it easier to recognise these contributions and give credit to peer reviewers. Traditionally, the peer review reports, editors letters and author responses are only shared between the small number of people in those roles prior to publication, but there is a growing interest in making some or all of these materials available. A small number of journals have been publishing peer review materials for some time, others have begun this practice more recently, and significantly more are now considering how they might begin. This article outlines the outcomes from a recent workshop among journals with experience in publishing peer review materials, in which the specific operation of these workflows, and the challenges, were discussed. Here, we provide a draft as to how to represent these materials in the JATS and Crossref data models to facilitate the coordination and discoverability of peer review materials, and seek feedback on these initial recommendations.  a2046-1402