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
-
The interspecific fungal hybrid Verticillium longisporum displays sub-genome-specific gene expression
This article has 10 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Evolution of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 over seven months: Experience of the nationwide seroprevalence ENE-COVID study in Spain
This article has 17 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Genomic epidemiology of the first two waves of SARS-CoV-2 in Canada
This article has 8 authors:This article has been curated by 1 group: -
Prolonged activation of nasal immune cell populations and development of tissue-resident SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cell responses following COVID-19
This article has 99 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
The impact of lockdown timing on COVID-19 transmission across US counties
This article has 6 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
A longitudinal study of convergence between Black and White COVID-19 mortality: A county fixed effects approach
This article has 4 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Structural and energetic profiling of SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain antibody recognition and the impact of circulating variants
This article has 7 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
A caveat to using wearable sensor data for COVID-19 detection: The role of behavioral change after receipt of test results
This article has 4 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Efficient inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 strains by a novel ACE2-IgG4-Fc fusion protein with a stabilized hinge region
This article has 13 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT
-
Cross-sectional study of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 studies: discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation
This article has 11 authors:Reviewed by ScreenIT