Preprints Involving Medical Research—Do the Benefits Outweigh the Challenges?
Editorial describes two short studies of current preprint access sites, and the benefits and pitfalls of public access to non-peer reviewed research, noting that preprint provides more information and is more helpful than press releases.
Source:
Journal of the American Medical Association
SPS commentary:
The article also highlights that many journals have the capacity, on a limited basis, to conduct expedited editorial evaluation and peer review and to publish manuscripts in a matter of weeks, and that although peer review is not without challenges and some limitations, the process does provide an important check and balance on the appropriate reporting of the conduct, analysis, interpretations, and conclusions of a study.
One study of 57 preprint servers found that although most used screening checks for preprints, they provided little explicit guidance on issues that are important for transparency in reporting and research integrity. Another study reports, that in its first year of operation, medRxiv had 11 052 submissions. While submissions increased steadily from launch to December 2019, COVID-19–related submissions contributed to the rapid growth in 2020. To date, 14% of preprints have been published in scientific journals, but the time frame for completing the peer-reviewed publication cycle was short. Nine percent of preprints received on-site comments, but this represents only a fraction of the interactions, as they are also occurring elsewhere, such as on social media. A small percentage of preprints have been withdrawn (0.002%), including 13 since January 2020 and related to COVID-19 reports.