ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025
Immediate and longer-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific productivity in ecology and evolution.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Immediate and longer-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific productivity in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
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
While the subject of much speculation, most quantitative assessments of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific productivity (i) are based on self-reported survey data, (ii) cover only a short period of time, (iii) may be biased by an increase in COVID-19-based research, (iv) cover a limited range of publishers or publishing outlets, and/or (v) cannot distinguish between changes in submission versus acceptance rates. Here we analyse submission and acceptance data from 2012 to 2023 for 25 journals in ecology and evolution, a field that has produced relatively few COVID-19-related articles. We show that although submission rates spiked when the pandemic began, they have been plummeting since. While there is variation in these patterns among countries and journals, the latter is unrelated to journal impact factor. The absence of a coinciding change in acceptance rates suggests that journals have not changed their quality standards to buffer these trends in productivity. Together, this demonstrates dynamic but long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific productivity, suggestive of fundamental changes to scientific practice and communication. A profitable direction for future research would be to build upon our results by targeting topic-, method- and system-related variation in productivity within and across journals.
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.