The BMJ has some neat features, such as paper-specific “instant responses” and published peer-review correspondence.
The latter feature allowed me to discover that in their initial “revise and resubmit” comments on a recent meta-analysis on sugar-sweetened beverages and type 2 diabetes, the BMJ manuscript committee requested the study’s authors to provide fewer data:
There is a very large number of supplementary files, tables and diagrams. It would be helpful if these could be reduced to the most important and essential supplementary items.
What? Why? Are they going to run out of server space? Give me ALL THE DATA! Finding the data I want in a huge 30mb supplementary data file is still much easier than asking the corresponding author for it 3 years later.
Is this kind of reviewer feedback common? I thought the top journals were generally on board with the open science trend.