The Problem With Preprints in Clinical Science

COMMENTARY

The Problem With Preprints in Clinical Science

F. Perry Wilson, MD, MSCE

Disclosures

November 11, 2020

4

Find the latest COVID-19 news and guidance in Medscape's Coronavirus Resource Center.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Welcome to Impact Factor, your weekly dose of commentary on a new medical study. I'm Dr F. Perry Wilson from the Yale School of Medicine.

When we look back on 2020, what will we call it? The year of the pandemic? The year of democracy? From a medical publishing standpoint, it's clear: 2020 is the year of the preprint.

Preprints: medical manuscripts published for all to see — before peer review.

The promise of preprint servers is nothing less than the democratization of medical science. Free, open publishing so researchers and readers of research can come together and make science better. But like all good ideas, it's about the execution.

While preprint servers like arXiv have been running for decades servicing the math and physics community, the medical research world has only more recently embraced bioRxiv (often for basic science papers) and the newcomer to the scene, medRxiv, for the clinical sciences. Full disclosure: medRxiv is run out of Yale, and I have nothing to do with it.

And according to this research letter in JAMA,medRxiv is taking off in 2020, thanks, of course, to COVID-19.

Comments

3090D553-9492-4563-8681-AD288FA52ACE
Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our Commenting Guide for further information. We reserve the right to remove posts at our sole discretion.

processing....