Publication practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: Biomedical preprints and peer-reviewed literature
Sevryugina, Y.; Dicks, A. J.
Show abstract
The coronavirus pandemic introduced many changes to our society, and deeply affected the established in biomedical sciences publication practices. In this article, we present a comprehensive study of the changes in scholarly publication landscape for biomedical sciences during the COVID-19 pandemic, with special emphasis on preprints posted on bioRxiv and medRxiv servers. We observe the emergence of a new category of preprint authors working in the fields of immunology, microbiology, infectious diseases, and epidemiology, who extensively used preprint platforms during the pandemic for sharing their immediate findings. The majority of these findings were works-in-progress unfitting for a prompt acceptance by refereed journals. The COVID-19 preprints that became peer-reviewed journal articles were often submitted to journals concurrently with the posting on a preprint server, and the entire publication cycle, from preprint to the online journal article, took on average 63 days. This included an expedited peer-review process of 43 days and journals production stage of 15 days, however there was a wide variation in publication delays between journals. Only one third of COVID-19 preprints posted during the first nine months of the pandemic appeared as peer-reviewed journal articles. These journal articles display high Altmetric Attention Scores further emphasizing a significance of COVID-19 research during 2020. This article will be relevant to editors, publishers, open science enthusiasts, and anyone interested in changes that the 2020 crisis transpired to publication practices and a culture of preprints in life sciences.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Citation needed?Wikipedia bibliometrics during the first waveof the COVID-19 pandemic. 93%
- Quantitative monitoring of nucleotide sequence data from genetic resources in context of their citation in the scientific literature 93%
- Myth-busting the provider-user relationship for digital sequence information 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Research productivity and collaboration of the NIH-funded HIV Vaccine Trials Network: a bibliometric analysis 92%
- Epi-Clock: A sensitive platform to help understand pathogenic disease outbreaks and facilitate the response to future outbreaks of concern 90%
- Integrate Structural Analysis, Isoform Diversity, and Interferon-Inductive Propensity of ACE2 to Refine SARS-CoV2 Susceptibility Prediction in Vertebrates 89%
"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.