I've read several articles lately on the uselessness of peer review.
From 2006, from the editor of BMJ:

"So peer review is a flawed process, full of easily identified defects with little evidence that it works. Nevertheless, it is likely to remain central to science and journals because there is no obvious alternative, and scientists and editors have a continuing belief in peer review. How odd that science should be rooted in belief."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/