The aim is to review current studies on peer review system as a method to understand its transparency. Studies were selected based on searches in PubMed, Nature, Elsevier, Science Direct, BioSpace, Sage using combination of the following key words ‘unconscious bias’, ‘fake reviews’, ‘citation manipulation’, ‘delay & slowness’, ‘quantitative indicators’. A systematic review of these variables shows that peer reviewing is the most harshly criticised area, despite being part and parcel of research. Mired in mediocrities, it is time to augment the standard of peer reviewing using quantitative indicators as well as giving training to its adherents on ethical publishing.