If you have the expertise and time, accepting the invitation to peer review on QEIOS can be a valuable contribution to the scholarly community. Ensure that the platform aligns with your ethical standards and that the manuscript's topic matches your expertise.
I have used Qeios for at least a year now to upload my pre-prints (half a dozen). It is similar to that offered by mdpi and research square. It is quite reputable, despite all the misgivings previously posted. I have even published with them. It is so much easier than with either the “predator” or the tyrant journals (Lancet, BMJ, JAMA, Nature portfolio journals, ….). I think it is the model of the future for dissemination of medical research. Even "published" articles can be updated. It may not appear on PubMed, at least not yet. So, perhaps Qeios might not be a great fit, if this is a priority. But google sees all.
Reviews of any pre-print are accelerated if the author subscribes to the pro plan. First 30 days are free. Cancel at anytime. After that it’s about 25 pounds per month. Updating a pre-print to version 2 is free. Updating to v3 requires the pro plan. Updating past v2 for mdpi preprints will end in rejection.
You will get a doi and those that access it can see reviews post publication. IMHO this model delivers a better more uptodate product than otherwise available.
It is all open access, and the reviews are more numerous. Not all are of high-quality, but those that are exceed that of the peer reviews you will encounter at most open access, $3000+ APC journals. Most with IF > 4 or 5 won't touch anything that departs from the official narrative or that promotes healthcare over medical care. No problem with Qeios!
Qeios is social media for nerds. They will ask people with no relevant background to comment on your article and will never remove defamatory reviews that accuse you of plagiarizing or worse. DO NOT USE QEIOS, IT IS NOT WORTH THE EFFORT!