ArticleF1000Research2019
Preprints and Scholarly Communication: Adoption, Practices, Drivers and Barriers.
Article in F1000Research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 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
- 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
- Public understanding of preprints: How audiences make sense of unreviewed research in the news.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2025Article
- The promise of community-driven preprints in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- From impact metrics and open science to communicating research: Journalists' awareness of academic controversies.PloS one · 2025Article
- "The Best Home for This Paper": A Qualitative Study of How Authors Select Where to Submit Manuscripts.Perspectives on medical education · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- COVID-19 and the scientific publishing system: growth, open access and scientific fields.Scientometrics · 2023Article
- The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- A guide to preprinting for early-career researchers.Biology open · 2022Article
- Examining linguistic shifts between preprints and publications.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Motivations, concerns and selection biases when posting preprints: A survey of bioRxiv authors.PloS one · 2022Article
- Using preprints in evidence synthesis: Commentary on experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Article
- Analysis of single comments left for bioRxiv preprints till September 2019.Biochemia medica · 2021Review
- Mycopathologia 2020: Legacy and Change to Remain Relevant for Content, Creation, and Communication.Mycopathologia · 2021Article
- The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape.PLoS biology · 2021Article
- COVID-19, children and schools: overlooked and at risk.The Medical journal of Australia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.