# PubPeer

> This plugin adds links to existing PubPeer comments on journal websites and PubMed.

Canonical page: [https://chrome-stats.com/d/pubpeer](https://chrome-stats.com/d/pubpeer)

## Overview

- **ID:** `pubpeer`
- **Platform:** Firefox
- **Type:** Firefox add-on
- **Status:** Available
- **Publisher:** PubPeer
- **Category:** search-tools,alerts-updates
- **Daily users:** 4,190
- **Weekly downloads:** 48
- **Rating:** 4.61 / 5 (23 ratings)
- **Version:** 1.7.1
- **Last updated:** 2024-11-29
- **First published:** 2014-04-03
- **Size:** 89 KB
- **Data as of:** 2026-09-12
- **Store listing:** [Firefox Add-ons Store](https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/pubpeer/)
- **Website:** [https://pubpeer.com](https://pubpeer.com/)

## Description

The PubPeer Chrome extension seamlessly integrates PubPeer comment links into journal websites and PubMed pages. This lightweight and unobtrusive plugin alerts users when an article has associated comments on PubPeer, enhancing scientific transparency and community discussion. It's easy to install and requires no configuration—simply install and benefit from real-time access to article peer feedback. Please note, this extension has no affiliation with PubMed or journal publishers.

## Rankings

- #1,345 — Overall
- #33 — Alerts & Updates
- #144 — Search Tools
- #108 — exist

## Permissions and access

### Permissions

- `webNavigation`
- `scripting`
- `storage`

### Host permissions

- `http://*/*`
- `https://*/*`

## Safety

- **Risk impact:** Moderate risk impact
- **Risk likelihood:** Low risk likelihood

### Analysis details

- Allows access to all websites, posing a significant security risk as it can monitor and modify data from any visited site.
- This extension has low user count. Unpopular extensions may not be stable or safe.

> Some risk analysis details are omitted from this free response. [Upgrade to view the full analysis](https://chrome-stats.com/pricing).

## Review summary

Overall, users praise PubPeer for making PubPeer discussions easy to spot and for its reliability, especially after updates. The kit is deemed very useful—almost a must‑have—for staying informed about questionable papers. Main drawbacks include UX issues on some sites (layout shifts) and occasional misflagging of articles, with a desire for finer controls like URL blacklisting and better Zotero integration.

### Pros

- Very useful for monitoring PubPeer activity and questionable articles.
- Works well / reliable across updates.

## Similar extensions and apps

- [PubPeer Pro](https://chrome-stats.com/d/pubpeer-pro) — 7 users
- [PB Comments Plugin](https://chrome-stats.com/d/pb-comments-plugin) — 31 users
- [CoCites \[Beta\]](https://chrome-stats.com/d/cocites-add-on) — 119 users, 2.00 / 5
- [PubMed Search Engine](https://chrome-stats.com/d/pubmed-search-engine) — 141 users, 5.00 / 5
- [SciHub Addon](https://chrome-stats.com/d/scihub-addon) — 441 users, 4.83 / 5
- [Enhances PubMed](https://chrome-stats.com/d/enhances-pubmed) — 5 users
- [Sci-Hub Linker](https://chrome-stats.com/d/sci-hub-linker) — 14 users, 5.00 / 5
- [OneScholar Beta](https://chrome-stats.com/d/sciadd) — 19 users
- [Remove Comments - thejournal.ie](https://chrome-stats.com/d/remove-comments-thejournal-ie)
- [Hide Comments Everywhere](https://chrome-stats.com/d/hide-comments-everywhere) — 278 users, 4.60 / 5
- [Get Comments](https://chrome-stats.com/d/get-comments) — 3.50 / 5
- [Sci Hub Injector](https://chrome-stats.com/d/scihub-injector) — 240 users, 5.00 / 5

---

Source: [Chrome-Stats](https://chrome-stats.com/d/pubpeer)