Many of my numerate readers will have read the account by Rick Trebino of Georgia Tech of trials and tribulations of responding to an error in the public record of the peer-reviewed literature, and have ideas of their own on what they would like to see.
Record ideas for what you would like to see below. (I am on vacation on the Great Barrier Reef right now, so excuse the brevity, typing this from the resort.) My wish list is below.
1. Code and data allow replication
2. Reviewers can act as coaches, where appropriate
3. Journals dedicated entirely to review of others’ studies