ArticlePloS one2023
PreprintMatch: A tool for preprint to publication detection shows global inequities in scientific publication.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decolonising Neglected Tropical Diseases research in Africa: insights, challenges and promising practices.BMJ global health · 2026Review
- PreprintToPaper dataset: connecting bioRxiv preprints with journal publications.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Dissemination and Implementation Theories, Models, or Frameworks Utilized in International Aging Research: A Citation Analysis.Global implementation research and applications · 2026Review
- Policy impact of the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team: global perspective and United Kingdom case study.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Determinants of obesity in Latin America.Nature metabolism · 2024 · on this mapReview
- Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Do organisms need an impact factor? Citations of key biological resources including model organisms reveal usage patterns and impact.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Comparison of effect estimates between preprints and peer-reviewed journal articles of COVID-19 trials.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Uncovering the effects of model initialization on deep model generalization: A study with adult and pediatric chest X-ray images.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Article
- The rise of preprints in earth sciences.F1000Research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Preprints, versions of scientific manuscripts that precede peer review, are growing in popularity. They offer an opportunity to democratize and accelerate research, as they have no publication costs or a lengthy peer review process. Preprints are often later published in peer-reviewed venues, but these publications and the original preprints are frequently not linked in any way. To this end, we developed a tool, PreprintMatch, to find matches between preprints and their corresponding published papers, if they exist. This tool outperforms existing techniques to match preprints and papers, both on matching performance and speed. PreprintMatch was applied to search for matches between preprints (from bioRxiv and medRxiv), and PubMed. The preliminary nature of preprints offers a unique perspective into scientific projects at a relatively early stage, and with better matching between preprint and paper, we explored questions related to research inequity. We found that preprints from low income countries are published as peer-reviewed papers at a lower rate than high income countries (39.6% and 61.1%, respectively), and our data is consistent with previous work that cite a lack of resources, lack of stability, and policy choices to explain this discrepancy. Preprints from low income countries were also found to be published quicker (178 vs 203 days) and with less title, abstract, and author similarity to the published version compared to high income countries. Low income countries add more authors from the preprint to the published version than high income countries (0.42 authors vs 0.32, respectively), a practice that is significantly more frequent in China compared to similar countries. Finally, we find that some publishers publish work with authors from lower income countries more frequently than others.
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.