Preprint review and curation
A list by Mark Williams
Interesting articles related to research culture, use of preprints and their review and curation activity.
Showing page 1 of 2 pages of list content
-
Understanding the Publish-Review-Curate (PRC) Model of Scholarly Communication
This article has 3 authors:Mark Williams
An overview of the PRC model and statistics relating to adoption. Sciety represents all organisations and communities offering variants of this model; curating preprints independent of review, community review and curation based on review.
-
Preprint servers and journals: Rivals or allies?
This article has 5 authors: -
-
Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science
This article has 53 authors: -
PReF: describing key Preprint Review Features
This article has 14 authors:Mark Williams
Each group on Sciety has a PReF table that describes their review process. This article details the features of preprint peer review and how they may differ from traditional peer review.
-
Open Science at the Generative AI Turn: An Exploratory Analysis of Challenges and Opportunities
This article has 4 authors:Reviewed by PREreview
-
Exploring Neuroscience Researchers’ Trust in Preprints through Citation Analysis
This article has 5 authors: -
Enabling preprint discovery, evaluation, and analysis with Europe PMC
This article has 4 authors:Mark Williams
An outline of how our friends at EuropePMC index preprints and their evaluation activity, which includes reviews from Sciety groups provided via Docmaps. The data shows "As of 4 April 2024 there are 12,209 reviewed preprints in Europe PMC", whereas on Sciety this number is 33,046 evaluated preprints. They cite challenges of; "Distributed access points, Limited metadata, Divergence of practices and standards, Lack of machine-readable status updates" all of which resonate with the work on Sciety and by working together as part of a Preprint Review Metadata working group, we can go some way to overcoming these.
-
Robustness of evidence reported in preprints during peer review
This article has 6 authors:Mark Williams
This paper adds to evidence supporting publishing results early through preprinting and dispelling concerns about reliability compared to what are traditionally called "published" papers. The article activity on Sciety shows the versions published to Research Square and to the journal.
From the discussion of the paper:
"Overall, articles submitted to preprint servers by researchers, especially on COVID-19, are largely complete versions of similar quality to published papers and can be expected to change little during peer review. " -
Preprint review services: Disrupting the scholarly communication landscape?
This article has 4 authors:Reviewed by PREreview
Mark Williams
Preprint review services have the potential to turn peer review into a more transparent and rewarding experience and to improve publishing and peer review workflows.
-
Insights from a survey of mentorship experiences by graduate and postdoctoral researchers
This article has 7 authors:Reviewed by preLights
-
Trusted Research: a Primer from CPNI
This article has 1 author:Mark Williams
Guidance from the UK govt:
"Trusted Research is there to help you identify and manage reputational, financial, legal and national security risks to your research. It helps you to ensure that all your collaborations have the levels of transparency,assurance and reputational awareness needed for Open Research to thrive" -
Preprints: a Primer from UKRN
This article has 4 authors:Mark Williams
An article from https://www.ukrn.org/primers/ that describes preprints and the process of uploading them to a chosen preprint server
-
Cardiology researchers’ practices and perceived barriers to open science: an international survey
This article has 8 authors: -
The Publication Facts Label: Ascertaining a Publication’s Adherence to Scholarly Standards
This article has 2 authors:Mark Williams
This article discusses the
"development of a Publication Facts Label (modeled on the nutrition facts label appearing on food products). It is designed to accompany journal research articles, and consolidates data for eight scholarly publishing standards, with a goal of informing and educating readers about such standards"
It is being trialed with OSF publications.
I came across this whilst reading this post https://oaspa.org/report-from-equity-in-oa-workshop-4-part-2-trust-as-the-new-prestige/ which advocates for transparency in publishing practices to inspire trust over traditional prestige metrics.
-
Controlled experiment finds no detectable citation bump from Twitter promotion
This article has 11 authors:Reviewed by PREreview
-
Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature
This article has 21 authors: -
To Preprint or Not to Preprint: A Global Researcher Survey
This article has 2 authors:Reviewed by PREreview
-
Exploring the use of preprints in dentistry
This article has 3 authors: -