Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific production

Machin-Mastromatteo, Juan D.; Tarango, Javier; Romo-González, José Refugio

doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-88493-8.00020-3

Cited by 4 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(18,86,87) The distinction between a preprint and a peer reviewed publication becomes imperative when you consider the unintended consequences of their use on not only clinical practice but also on researchers to judge research performance, quality or productivity. (2,24,52,54,88) Whilst preprints can be part of the process to promote open research, by applying the principles of transparency and integrity, we also need to appreciate and acknowledge the associated caveats and limitations of their use. (20,21,28,52) Although the COVID-19 pandemic has informed a greater appreciation for the scholarly landscape on the use and acceptability of preprints, the absence of peer review has led to the withdrawal of several preprints.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Increases the volume of literature, resulting in increased time to review and discover quality evidence (mishmash of papers of various quality; information overload; information overlap) (6,11,24,25,32,95) 6 3…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although preprints have been established in some disciplines for more than 20 years, the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the rapid progress of preprints, both for their value and their shortcomings. (8,(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34) Preprints are considered to lack scientific integrity, credibility and quality, and there is still reservation among editors, publishers, journals and researchers about the role of preprints and their contribution to science. (6,30,(35)(36)(37)(38)(39) The evidence provided several process issues related to why preprints lack quality, screening, or quality checks during the submission of a manuscript to a preprint server.…”

Section: Barriers and Challenges Associated With Preprintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(69) The COVID-19 pandemic may have initiated a cultural shift in the use of preprints by academia, publishers, funding organisations, the public and policymakers as a whole. (20,24,25,65) Academic community acceptability of preprints One of the key challenges for the academic community is the lack of or no clear policies on the citation of preprints, from publishers and journals but also funding organisations. Klebel et al (2020) found approximately 75% of journals do not have clear policies on co-reviewing, citation of preprints and publication of reviewers' identities for preprints.…”

Section: Benefits and Value Of Preprintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Freely accessible and freely reproducible preprints mean the value (e.g., quality) of scientific articles no longer needs peer review but is open to the evaluation and use of the whole scientific community (3,11,18,24,50,53,62,65,66,80,89,97,107) 12 13…”

Section: Publishers and Researchersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: a scoping review

Blatch-Jones¹,

Saucedo²,

Giddins³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Preprints are open and accessible scientific manuscript or report that has not been submitted to a peer reviewed journal. The value and importance of preprints has grown since its contribution during the public health emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic. Funders and publishers are establishing their position on the use of preprints, in grant applications and publishing models. However, the evidence supporting the use and acceptability of preprints varies across funders, publishers, and researchers. The purpose of this scoping review was to explore the current evidence on the use and acceptability of preprints by publishers, funders, and the research community throughout the research lifecycle.Methods: A scoping review was undertaken with no study or language limits. The search strategy was limited to the last five years (2017-2022) to capture changes influenced by COVID-19 (e.g., accelerated use and role of preprints in research). The review included international literature, including grey literature, and two databases were searched: Scopus and Web of Science (24 August 2022). Results: 379 titles and abstracts and 193 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Ninety-eight articles met eligibility criteria and were included for full extraction. For barriers and challenges, 26 statements were grouped under four main themes (e.g., volume/growth of publications, quality assurance/trustworthiness, risks associated to credibility, and validation). For benefits and value, 34 statements were grouped under six themes (e.g., openness/transparency, increased visibility/credibility, open review process, open research, democratic process/systems, increased productivity/opportunities).Conclusions: Preprints provide opportunities for rapid dissemination but there is a need for clear policies and guidance from journals, publishers, and funders. Cautionary measures are needed to maintain the quality and value of preprints, paying particular attention to how findings are translated to the public. More research is needed to address some of the uncertainties addressed in this review.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Barriers and Challenges Associated With Preprintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Benefits and Value Of Preprintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Publishers and Researchersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: a scoping review

Blatch-Jones¹,

Saucedo²,

Giddins³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Phase 4 clinical trials in the era of the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic and their importance to optimize the COVID-19 vaccination

Ralise

Camargo

Marson

2023

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the appearance of SARS-CoV-2, the scientific community has worked relentlessly to gather enough information about the illness caused by this virus infection. Such great effort has resulted in increased scientific publication, including phase 4 clinical trials addressing the applicability of COVID-19 vaccines. In those trials that investigated the properties of the vaccine among participants with morbidities, mainly immunocompromised individuals, the safety was recommended, but in the presence of immunogenicity, such protection was considered of short and medium terms. It was also observed that a physically active lifestyle might increase the immunogenicity of the COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases and in immunocompromised patients. The coadministration of different types of vaccine such as the combination of the recombinant adenovirus type 5 (AD5)-vectored Convidecia as heterologous reinforcement vs. CoronaVac with homologous reinforcement in adults previously vaccinated with CoronaVac, as well as the coadministration of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine followed by the administration of the tetravalent influenza vaccine (Fragmented, Inactivated) and the pneumococcal vaccine 23 presented satisfactory immunogenicity. However, the heterologous reinforcement had better immunogenicity when compared to the homologous reinforcement. Simultaneous COVID-19 vaccination and vaccines against seasonal influenza did not raise safety issues, producing acceptable levels of adverse reactions and preserving the antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2. In the lot-to-lot consistency evaluation, CoronaVac was seen to induce an immune response considered relatively high, and the lots presented a similar profile of stability and immunogenicity, thus enabling their large-scale distribution. In brief, this article addressed, mainly, the importance of evaluating the immunological response in the COVID-19 vaccination in patients with specific health conditions (e.g., immunocompromised individuals) aiming at enabling adjustments to the vaccine calendar in national vaccination programs.

show abstract

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review

Blatch-Jones,

Recio Saucedo,

Giddins

2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Preprints are open and accessible scientific manuscript or report that is shared publicly, through a preprint server, before being submitted to a journal. The value and importance of preprints has grown since its contribution during the public health emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic. Funders and publishers are establishing their position on the use of preprints, in grant applications and publishing models. However, the evidence supporting the use and acceptability of preprints varies across funders, publishers, and researchers. The scoping review explored the current evidence on the use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings by publishers, funders, and the research community throughout the research lifecycle. Methods A scoping review was undertaken with no study or language limits. The search strategy was limited to the last five years (2017–2022) to capture changes influenced by COVID-19 (e.g., accelerated use and role of preprints in research). The review included international literature, including grey literature, and two databases were searched: Scopus and Web of Science (24 August 2022). Results 379 titles and abstracts and 193 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Ninety-eight articles met eligibility criteria and were included for full extraction. For barriers and challenges, 26 statements were grouped under four main themes (e.g., volume/growth of publications, quality assurance/trustworthiness, risks associated to credibility, and validation). For benefits and value, 34 statements were grouped under six themes (e.g., openness/transparency, increased visibility/credibility, open review process, open research, democratic process/systems, increased productivity/opportunities). Conclusions Preprints provide opportunities for rapid dissemination but there is a need for clear policies and guidance from journals, publishers, and funders. Cautionary measures are needed to maintain the quality and value of preprints, paying particular attention to how findings are translated to the public. More research is needed to address some of the uncertainties addressed in this review.

show abstract

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific production

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: a scoping review

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: a scoping review

Phase 4 clinical trials in the era of the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic and their importance to optimize the COVID-19 vaccination

The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About