ArticlePLoS biology2019
On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective.
Article in PLoS biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed.
- A bibliometric analysis of preprints in traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine research.Medicine · 2026Article
- Bridging functional bionanomaterials and the clinic: strategic communication as a translational enabler.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Awareness, Experiences, and Attitudes Toward Preprints Among Medical Academics: Convergent Mixed Methods Study.JMIRx med · 2026Article
- Comparison of preprints and their corresponding peer-reviewed publications in the health field: a scoping review.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Review
- Preprint policies across journals and publishers in ecology and evolutionary biology.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Ending publication bias: A values-based approach to surface null and negative results.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Hurdles to open access publishing faced by authors: a scoping literature review from 2004 to 2023.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- The promise of community-driven preprints in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- An international, cross-sectional survey of preprint attitudes among biomedical researchers.F1000Research · 2024Article
- An analysis of the effects of sharing research data, code, and preprints on citations.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- Valuing peer review at Disease Models & Mechanisms.Disease models & mechanisms · 2024Article
- Scope and financial impact of unpublished data and unused samples among U.S. academic and government researchers.iScience · 2023Article
- Shedding light on functional near-infrared spectroscopy and open science practices.Neurophotonics · 2023Article
- The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Changes in health communication in the age of COVID-19: A study on the dissemination of preprints to the public.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- The rise of preprints in earth sciences.F1000Research · 2023Article
- Article
- Ten simple rules for failing successfully in academia.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Why don't we share data and code? Perceived barriers and benefits to public archiving practices.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peer-reviewed journal publication is the main means for academic researchers in the life sciences to create a permanent public record of their work. These publications are also the de facto currency for career progress, with a strong link between journal brand recognition and perceived value. The current peer-review process can lead to long delays between submission and publication, with cycles of rejection, revision, and resubmission causing redundant peer review. This situation creates unique challenges for early career researchers (ECRs), who rely heavily on timely publication of their work to gain recognition for their efforts. Today, ECRs face a changing academic landscape, including the increased interdisciplinarity of life sciences research, expansion of the researcher population, and consequent shifts in employer and funding demands. The publication of preprints, publicly available scientific manuscripts posted on dedicated preprint servers prior to journal-managed peer review, can play a key role in addressing these ECR challenges. Preprinting benefits include rapid dissemination of academic work, open access, establishing priority or concurrence, receiving feedback, and facilitating collaborations. Although there is a growing appreciation for and adoption of preprints, a minority of all articles in life sciences and medicine are preprinted. The current low rate of preprint submissions in life sciences and ECR concerns regarding preprinting need to be addressed. We provide a perspective from an interdisciplinary group of ECRs on the value of preprints and advocate their wide adoption to advance knowledge and facilitate career development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.