RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @DeplazesEvelyne: How much difference is there between #preprint and the final published #Researchpaper? Two studies in @PLOSBiology s…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
How much difference is there between #preprint and the final published #Researchpaper? Two studies in @PLOSBiology scrutinise this https://t.co/1z0v9n9ZiJ https://t.co/yDkRlWlPAV #bioRxiv #sciencetwitter #ChemTwitter #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
I’m a huge preprint proponent and this tracks with my own work….but (insert Survivor.bias.jpeg) though….
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
Interesting. But it's always important to remember that preprints are not a representative subset of articles submitted to journals. https://t.co/1kVjWfw99N
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
RT @blekhman: Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out…
Comparing preprints to their final published versions: - 93% of articles do not change their main conclusions - only 1 out of 184 published papers contradicted a conclusion made by its preprint https://t.co/juxoZRXWZB
RT @ElliotHershberg: Preprints are free, immediate publishing. Journals can cost thousands of dollars, take years to publish, and paywall…
Sobre preprints del principio de la pandemia 👉🏻 el 82,8% sobre coronavirus y el 92,8% no relacionadas con el coronavirus no vieron ningún cambio material en sus conclusiones tras la publicación revisada por pares. Pas mal! https://t.co/EpxCCEk1Tg
RT @niallpboyce: The more I think about it, the more it seems that the future for scientific and medical #journals is a shift from “gatekee…
RT @niallpboyce: The more I think about it, the more it seems that the future for scientific and medical #journals is a shift from “gatekee…
RT @GSCollins: "the main conclusions of 93% of non-COVID-19– related life sciences articles do not change from their preprint to final publ…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @JohnRInglis: Assessing >180 @biorxivpreprint and @medrxivpreprint articles posted in the first 4 mo of the pandemic, @JACoates et al fo…
RT @JE_Faure: Interesting article on how preprints are reliable #OpenScience ➡️https://t.co/6XlptitVey https://t.co/PsQFZdrKYm
"7.2% of non-COVID-19–related and 17.2% of COVID-19–related abstracts undergo a discrete change by the time of publication, but the majority.. do not.. change the conclusions of the paper." This makes me feel less bad for my 2020 MedRxiv obsession https
RT @niallpboyce: The more I think about it, the more it seems that the future for scientific and medical #journals is a shift from “gatekee…
RT @niallpboyce: “The conclusions of 7.2% of non-COVID-19–related and 17.2% of COVID-19–related abstracts undergo a discrete change by the…
RT @niallpboyce: The more I think about it, the more it seems that the future for scientific and medical #journals is a shift from “gatekee…
RT @niallpboyce: The more I think about it, the more it seems that the future for scientific and medical #journals is a shift from “gatekee…
The more I think about it, the more it seems that the future for scientific and medical #journals is a shift from “gatekeepers and paywallers of data” to “convenors and purveyors of expert analysis”. #OpenAccess #OpenScience https://t.co/4aMFNKbHeB
RT @JE_Faure: Interesting article on how preprints are reliable #OpenScience ➡️https://t.co/6XlptitVey https://t.co/PsQFZdrKYm
Reprints zu lesen vorab gab es früher nie. Zum Glück halten meistens die Reprints. Studie anbei: #pandemie #corona #coronavirus #COVID19 #lockdown #medrxiv https://t.co/7Phw3n2um2
RT @JE_Faure: Interesting article on how preprints are reliable #OpenScience ➡️https://t.co/6XlptitVey https://t.co/PsQFZdrKYm
RT @JE_Faure: Interesting article on how preprints are reliable #OpenScience ➡️https://t.co/6XlptitVey https://t.co/PsQFZdrKYm
RT @JE_Faure: Interesting article on how preprints are reliable #OpenScience ➡️https://t.co/6XlptitVey https://t.co/PsQFZdrKYm
Interesting article on how preprints are reliable #OpenScience ➡️https://t.co/6XlptitVey https://t.co/PsQFZdrKYm
@drdevangm @cshperspectives @JACoates @LucreSnooker @npokorzynski @razibkhan ?? I'm talking about the dataset for this paper. https://t.co/g5u4TOTJyY I've found 6 of 77 manuscripts that were *accepted* at journals before posted as preprints. Another 9 wer
RT @BehavEcolPapers: Tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/uf9sJrylni @PLOSBiolo…
“The conclusions of 7.2% of non-COVID-19–related and 17.2% of COVID-19–related abstracts undergo a discrete change by the time of publication, but the majority of these changes do not qualitatively change the conclusions of the paper.” https://t.co/soWpLgr
Preprints are free, immediate publishing. Journals can cost thousands of dollars, take years to publish, and paywall knowledge. 92.8% of the time, there is no meaningful change. What are we doing? https://t.co/0YMtgNZLoV
RT @OAImperial: Interested in this? Come to the webinar! https://t.co/6yeFSvYqAN
@JavierDeVilla @EricTopol @TheEconomist Here are the links to the *FREE* @PLOSBiology studies underlying this article: https://t.co/UWMlOT2DXL https://t.co/wO7FYrqRlq
Interested in this? Come to the webinar! https://t.co/6yeFSvYqAN
@EricTopol @TheEconomist It is exceptionally important to note that the only preprints studied in the work written up in the Economist were the preprints later accepted for publication. https://t.co/FHGRRfEupG
For those without the $$ to get behind @TheEconomist's paywall, here are the links to the *FREE* @PLOSBiology studies underlying this article: https://t.co/UWMlOSL36d https://t.co/wO7FYr9gtS
RT @GSCollins: "the main conclusions of 93% of non-COVID-19– related life sciences articles do not change from their preprint to final publ…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @CMillerLab: "...we constructed a web application (https://t.co/p1aUMfdHZG) that allows users to identify journals and articles that are…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @GSCollins: "the main conclusions of 93% of non-COVID-19– related life sciences articles do not change from their preprint to final publ…
RT @egiglia: See the original paper here: https://t.co/s30VrF5LIS #openscience #preprints https://t.co/6s3ehuK34M
See the original paper here: https://t.co/s30VrF5LIS #openscience #preprints
@brembs See the original paper by Johnaton Coats in Plos Biology here https://t.co/s30VrF5LIS
@LudoWaltman
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @PLOSBiology: Can we trust #preprints? Study reveals that most preprints published in first 4 months of the #COVID19 #pandemic are compa…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @JACoates: @TheEconomist running a piece about #preprints & our latest @PLOSBiology paper! https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p https://t.co/GsOyoo2b…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @PLOSBiology: What's the difference between a #preprint and the final published paper? Two back-to-back studies in @PLOSBiology scrutini…
RT @CMillerLab: "...we constructed a web application (https://t.co/p1aUMfdHZG) that allows users to identify journals and articles that are…
@DrTregoning @drdevangm Thinking out loud (great song) is always welcome! That's our first COVID paper (which I, in a definitely unbiased way think everyone should also read). Here's the latest one https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p 😀
RT @GSCollins: "the main conclusions of 93% of non-COVID-19– related life sciences articles do not change from their preprint to final publ…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
Tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/0w5LbHRC65
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
interesting! does it hold across disciplines? (also, there are manuscripts that do not make it to publication, so 15% estimate is after this selection)
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
RT @Stephen_Curry: From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a prepri…
From my own experience I’ve estimated that peer review is rarely a game-changer and adds 10-15% to the value in a preprint. This new study seems to bear that out. https://t.co/FMWPrsX7Wz
@Dlf_Forschung @JACoates @PLOSBiology link zum #OpenAccess Artikel 👇https://t.co/FUZP9Syjy2
RT @JACoates: @TheEconomist running a piece about #preprints & our latest @PLOSBiology paper! https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p https://t.co/GsOyoo2b…