Timeline from receipt to online publication of COVID-19 original research articles
Barakat, A. F.; Shokr, M.; Ibrahim, J.; Mandrola, J.; Elgendy, I. Y.
Show abstract
ObjectiveTo examine the timeline from submission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID)-related original articles compared with non-COVID-related original articles. BackgroundThere have been growing concerns about the speed and rigor of the review process for COVID-related articles by journals. MethodsUsing Dimensions, an online searchable platform, we identified PubMed-indexed journals that published >50 COVID-related articles (regardless of article type) between 1/1/2020 and 5/16/2020 and had available data on the date of article receipt. For the control group, we included consecutive full-length original investigations with available receipt date (regardless of topic) published in these journals starting from 3/1/2019 until a 1:2 ratio of COVID to non-COVID-related articles per journal was achieved. ResultsThe final number included 294 COVID-related full-length original investigations with available article receipt dates published in 16 journals with corresponding 588 control articles from the same journals. The median time from article receipt to online publication was 20 (11-32) days for COVID-articles vs. 119 (62-182) days for controls (P<0.001). The median time to final acceptance (available for 97% of the articles) was 13 (5-23) days for COVID vs. 102 (55-161) days for controls (P<0.001). These observations were seen across all the included journals in the analysis. ConclusionsIn this analysis of full-length original investigations published in 16 medical journals, the median time from receipt to final acceptance of COVID-related articles was 8 times faster compared to non-COVID-related articles published in a similar time frame in the previous year. Online publication was 6 times faster for COVID-related articles compared to controls.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Investigating the Nature of Open Science Practices Across Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Journals: An Audit 94%
- Transparency in peer review: Exploring the content and tone of reviewers' confidential comments to editors 94%
- Reliability of citations of medRxiv preprints in articles published on COVID-19 in the world leading medical journals 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open-access publishing each year 94%
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 93%
- Reporting of Retrospective Registration in Clinical Trial Publications 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Studies of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Global Analysis of Literature 95%
- How the COVID-19 pandemic is shaping research in Africa: inequalities in scholarly output and collaborations and new opportunities for scientific leadership 92%
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital services for patients with cardiac diseases: a scoping review 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical findings in critical ill patients infected with SARS-Cov-2 in Guangdong Province, China: a multi-center, retrospective, observational study 90%
- Is the infection of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant associated with the outcomes of COVID-19 patients? 89%
- Mortality and Severity in COVID-19 Patients on ACEIs & ARBs - A Meta-Regression Analysis 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Chest CT Features of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A Meta-analysis of 19 Trials 90%
- Prediction and Evolution of B Cell Epitopes of Surface Protein in SARS-CoV-2 88%
- Generation and characterization of an ovine cell line derived from peripheral blood and its potential use to study livestock and zoonotic viral infections 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.