Automated screening of COVID-19 preprints: can we help authors to improve transparency and reproducibility?

Weissgerber, Tracey L.; Riedel, Nico; Kilicoglu, Halil; Labbé, Cyril; Eckmann, Peter; Riet, Gerben ter; Byrne, Jennifer A.; Cabanac, Guillaume; Capes‐Davis, Amanda; Favier, Bertrand; Saladi, Shyam; Grabitz, Peter; Bannach‐Brown, Alexandra; Schulz, Robert; McCann, Sarah; Bernard, René; Bandrowski, Anita

doi:10.1038/s41591-020-01203-7

Cited by 49 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If submissions continue to grow, there will be a need to develop automated tools to help screen preprints so that this burden does not become overwhelming to the volunteer researchers. We are seeing early steps in this space with the use of SciScore and other automated tools to screen and provide automated reports on medRxiv and bioRxiv COVID-19 preprints (Weissgerber et al, 2021).…”

Section: Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preprints: Their Evolving Role in Science Communication

Puebla¹,

Polka²,

Rieger³

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charleston Briefings: Trending Topics for Information Professionals is a thoughtprovoking series of brief books concerning innovation in the sphere of libraries, publishing, and technology in scholarly communication. The briefings, growing out of the vital conversations characteristic of the Charleston Conference and Against the Grain, will offer valuable insights into the trends shaping our professional lives and the institutions in which we work.The Charleston Briefings are written by authorities who provide an effective, readable overview of their topics-not an academic monograph. The intended audience is busy nonspecialist readers who want to be informed concerning important issues in our industry in an accessible and timely manner.

show abstract

Section: Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preprints: Their Evolving Role in Science Communication

Puebla¹,

Polka²,

Rieger³

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If preprint submissions continue to grow, we will probably need to develop automated tools to help screen preprint submissions so that this burden does not become overwhelming to the volunteer researchers. We are seeing early steps in this space with the use of SciScore and other automated tools to screen and provide automated reports on medRxiv and bioRxiv COVID-19 preprints (Weissgerber et al, 2021) As preprint adoption grows and we build evidence as to whether preprints generate wider impact for research and potentially help reduce waste in funding, we may see additional funders and institutions update their policies and assessment frameworks to incorporate preprints. Research evaluation frameworks can take time to evolve, but as we have seen through DORA and other initiatives, a number of researchers and institutions are taking steps towards more inclusive evaluation systems that account for a broader range of research outputs (Hatch & Curry, 2020) .…”

Section: Conclusion and Open Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preprints: Their Evolving Role in Science Communication

Puebla¹,

Rieger²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of preprints for the dissemination of research in some life sciences branches has increased substantially over the last few years. In this document, we discuss preprint publishing and use in the life sciences, from initial experiments back in the 1960s to the current landscape. We explore the perspectives, advantages and perceived concerns that different stakeholders associate with preprints, and where preprints stand in the context of research assessment frameworks. We also discuss the role of preprints in the publishing ecosystem and within open science more broadly, before outlining some remaining open questions and considerations for the future evolution of preprints.

show abstract

“… 31 The subscription based tool uses conditional random field algorithms to detect entities. 31 Barzooka is a tool developed by Riedel, Weissgerber and colleagues, which flags the inappropriate use of bar graphs for continuous data (RRID:SCR_018508; https://quest-barzooka.bihealth.org 32 ). Being able to embed these and other tools as they are developed and validated, into systematic review pipelines will be paramount to utilising their combined benefits.…”

Section: Presentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…bihealth. org 32 ). Being able to embed these and other tools as they are developed and validated, into systematic review pipelines will be paramount to utilising their combined benefits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%