Back

Evaluating Regional Diversity in Scientific Communication: A Comparative Analysis of COVID-19 Preprints and Peer-Reviewed Publications

Kim, D. H.; Jeon, K. L.; You, S. C.

2025-01-10 public and global health
10.1101/2025.01.04.25319994 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic has triggered extensive global research, leading to an overwhelming surge in publications with surge of preprints. Despite the proliferation of preprints during the pandemic, the specific details of their implications for global diversity, along with their utility, remain underexplored. In this study, we assess the contribution of COVID-19 preprints in diverse aspects. MethodsWe collected COVID-19-related peer-reviewed papers and preprints from SCOPUS and MedRxiv, respectively, between December 2019 to November 2022. We analyzed four key aspects of scientific communication: 1) international co-authorship patterns using network analysis and eigenvector centrality, 2) publication patterns through relative ratio analysis comparing preprint to peer-reviewed paper counts, 3) social media dissemination through analysis of X (formerly Twitter) post quotations, and 4) citation impact by comparing citation counts between peer-reviewed papers with and without preprint history. All analyses were stratified by country income levels and geographical regions. ResultsNetwork analysis revealed higher co-authorship diversity in preprints, with Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean showing 3.9 to 4.5 times higher eigenvector centrality compared to peer-reviewed papers. Countries with lower GDP showed significantly higher preprint publication ratios (correlation coefficient: -0.38, p-value < 0.001). Social media analysis demonstrated higher engagement with preprints, as evidenced by higher median numbers of social media quotations for preprints across all income groups. Peer-reviewed papers with preprint history received significantly higher citations (median: 10, IQR: 3-30) compared to those without (median: 5, IQR: 1-15, p-value < 0.001), particularly pronounced in low- and middle-income countries. ConclusionThis study demonstrates the significant role of preprints in advancing regional diversity in scientific communication during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings show enhanced international collaboration through preprints, particularly benefiting researchers from lower-income regions, higher social media engagement across income groups, and increased citation impact for papers with preprint history. These results highlight preprints as an important tool for promoting more equitable global scientific discourse.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 2%
14.9%
2
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
12.9%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.5%
4
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 15%
4.5%
5
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
6
Data in Brief
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
7
Frontiers in Physics
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.5%
9
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
10
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.0%
12
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
13
Life Science Alliance
263 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
14
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.5%
15
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
16
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
17
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
18
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
19
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
20
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Alzheimer's & Dementia
143 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 56%
0.8%
24
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
25
FEBS Letters
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 62%
0.8%
27
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
29
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 39%
0.5%
30
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%