The article discusses the challenges and future of peer review in scientific publishing, emphasizing the increasing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in addressing these issues. The authors highlight three main areas of concern: effectiveness, fairness, and efficiency. They argue that AI, particularly large-language models, can assist in triaging manuscripts, detecting research misconduct, and assessing adherence to reporting guidelines more effectively than human reviewers. The article also addresses the biases and inefficiencies in traditional peer review, such as the difficulty in identifying fabricated data and the increasing workload on reviewers. While acknowledging concerns about confidentiality and bias, the authors envision a future where AI is used to initially screen submissions, providing a quality assessment that editors can then use to decide whether to request peer review. They conclude that editors should embrace AI to improve the peer review process and ensure that authors' work is fairly and appropriately considered.The article discusses the challenges and future of peer review in scientific publishing, emphasizing the increasing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in addressing these issues. The authors highlight three main areas of concern: effectiveness, fairness, and efficiency. They argue that AI, particularly large-language models, can assist in triaging manuscripts, detecting research misconduct, and assessing adherence to reporting guidelines more effectively than human reviewers. The article also addresses the biases and inefficiencies in traditional peer review, such as the difficulty in identifying fabricated data and the increasing workload on reviewers. While acknowledging concerns about confidentiality and bias, the authors envision a future where AI is used to initially screen submissions, providing a quality assessment that editors can then use to decide whether to request peer review. They conclude that editors should embrace AI to improve the peer review process and ensure that authors' work is fairly and appropriately considered.