> Formerly known as "peer review".

An in-depth review of a paper in advance of publication is common (although that system isn't as reliable as had one been assumed). Such an exhaustive review after publication is rare, for multiple reasons.

One serious problem with post-publication review is that the original data are rarely made available to reviewers. For example, academic critics of the work of Diederik Stapel couldn't justify revoking his Ph.D. because the original data that might have proved his fraud no longer existed. He eventually voluntarily gave up his degree[1], possibly to try to avoid a deeper investigation into his behavior.

1. http://www.science20.com/cool-links/dutch_psychologist_diede...