Biomedical Journals and Preprint Services: Friends or Foes?
@article{Annesley2017BiomedicalJA,
title={Biomedical Journals and Preprint Services: Friends or Foes?},
author={Thomas M. Annesley and Mitchell Scott and H Bastian and Vivian Fonseca and John P. A. Ioannidis and Michael A Keller and Jessica K. Polka},
journal={Clinical chemistry},
year={2017},
volume={63 2},
pages={
453-458
}
}As authors know, the current path for recognition and “scorekeeping” of contributions to biomedical science is publication in journals following the peer-review process. Many believe that the peer-review process is as old as scientific publishing itself. In reality, the peer-review process, as we know it today, is relatively recent. When the first scientific journal, the Royal Society's Philosophical Transactions , began in 1665, the content was under the control of a single editor who…
Topics from this paper
16 Citations
Pharmaceutical industry–authored preprints: scientific and social media impact
- MedicineCurrent medical research and opinion
- 2020
It is found that pharma-authored research is being increasingly published as preprints and is also being cited in other peer-reviewed publications and discussed in social media.
Preprint Servers in Kidney Disease Research: A Rapid Review.
- MedicineClinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN
- 2020
Given the prominent online presence of the nephrology community, it is poised to lead the medicine community in appropriate use of preprint servers, and specific considerations regarding preprint server use in medicine are discussed.
Systematic examination of preprint platforms for use in the medical and biomedical sciences setting
- MedicineBMJ Open
- 2020
A large number of preprint platforms exist for use in biomedical and medical sciences, all of which offer researchers an opportunity to rapidly disseminate their research findings onto an open-access public server, subject to scope and eligibility.
How many preprints have actually been printed and why: a case study of computer science preprints on arXiv
- Computer ScienceScientometrics
- 2020
A case study of computer science preprints submitted to arXiv from 2008 to 2017 is conducted to quantify how many preprints have eventually been printed in peer-reviewed venues and introduces a semantics-based mapping method with the employment of Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT).
Editorial: A Response to Criticisms of the OpenPsych Journals
- PsychologyOpen Differential Psychology
- 2018
The OpenPsych journals were set up in 2014 by Emil Kirkegaard and Davide Piffer due to dissatisfaction with existing journals in differential psychology and behavioural genetics. To date, 51 papers…
A systematic examination of preprint platforms for use in the medical and biomedical sciences setting
- Medicine
- 2020
A searchable database is provided as a valuable resource for researchers, funders and policymakers in the biomedical and medical science field to determine which preprint platforms are relevant to their research scope and which have the functionality and policies that they value most.
Preprints During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Public Health Emergencies and Medical Literature.
- MedicineJournal of hospital medicine
- 2020
Although many journals have since expedited their review processes in light of current pressing circumstances, these measures are not necessarily sustainable or scalable in the face of an increasingly expansive biomedical enterprise that will continue to face challenges of increasing urgency.
Preprints: ethical hazard or academic liberation?
- Art
- 2017
Preprints are one of publishing’s hottest talking topics. Having seen a strengthening of investment by several entities and publishers in 2016, both 2016 and 2017 have witnessed a tsunami of new…
Open science practices in clinical psychology journals: An audit study.
- PsychologyJournal of abnormal psychology
- 2019
An audit of 60 clinical psychology journals, covering the first 2 quartiles by impact factor, showed extremely low compliance for prospective registration and data sharing and only half of the articles included a COI disclosure.
While it is not deliberate, much of today's biomedical research contains logical and technical flaws, showing a need for corrective action
- BiologyInternational journal of medical sciences
- 2018
Questions are raised on technical details of RNA reverse transcription, polymerase chain reactions, western blotting and immunohistochemical staining, as these methods are basic and are the base for other modern biotechnologies and many conclusions drawn from the studies using those ever-more-sophisticated techniques may be even more problematic.