ScreenIT
The Automated Screening Working Groups is a group of software engineers and biologists passionate about improving scientific manuscripts on a large scale. Our members have created tools that check for common problems in scientific manuscripts, including information needed to improve transparency and reproducibility. We have combined our tools into a single pipeline, called ScreenIT. We're currently using our tools to screen COVID preprints.
Latest preprint reviews
-
Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome and its prolonged effects: An updated systematic review
This article has 19 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antibody detection in breast milk from a prospective multicentre study in Spain
This article has 17 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Analysis of 472,688 severe cases of COVID-19 in Brazil showed lower mortality in those vaccinated against influenza
This article has 6 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
A linear mixed model to estimate COVID‐19‐induced excess mortality
This article has 7 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Towards Fixed Dosing of Tocilizumab in ICU-Admitted COVID-19 Patients: Results of an Observational Population Pharmacokinetic and Descriptive Pharmacodynamic Study
This article has 10 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and wellbeing of parents with young children: a qualitative interview study
This article has 5 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Unmanaged Pharmacogenomic and Drug Interaction Risk Associations with Hospital Length of Stay among Medicare Advantage Members with COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study
This article has 11 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
First description of two immune escape indian B.1.1.420 and B.1.617.1 SARS-CoV2 variants in France
This article has 6 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Seroconversion rates following COVID-19 vaccination among patients with cancer
This article has 23 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Systematic on-site testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection among asymptomatic essential workers in Montréal, Canada: a prospective observational and cost-assessment study
This article has 5 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT