An international, cross-sectional survey of preprint attitudes among biomedical researchers

Author:

Ng Jeremy Y.,Chow Valerie,Santoro Lucas J.,Armond Anna Catharina Vieira,Pirshahid Sanam Ebrahimzadeh,Cobey Kelly D.ORCID,Moher DavidORCID

Abstract

Background Preprints are scientific manuscripts that are made available on open-access servers but are not yet peer reviewed. Although preprints are becoming more prevalent, uptake is not uniform or optimal. Understanding researchers’ opinions and attitudes toward preprints is valuable for their successful implementation. Understanding knowledge gaps and researchers’ attitudes toward preprinting can assist stakeholders, such as journals, funding agencies, and universities, to implement preprints more effectively. Here, we aimed to collect perceptions and behaviours regarding preprints across an international sample of biomedical researchers. Methods Biomedical authors were identified by a keyword-based, systematic search of the MEDLINE database, and their emails were extracted to invite them to our survey. A cross-sectional anonymous survey was distributed to all identified biomedical authors to collect their knowledge, attitudes, and opinions regarding preprinting. Results The survey was completed by 730 biomedical researchers with a response rate of 3.20% and demonstrated a wide range of attitudes and opinions about preprints with authors from various disciplines and career stages worldwide. Most respondents were familiar with the concept of preprints but most had not previously published a preprint. The lead author of the project and journal policy had the greatest impact on decisions to post a preprint, whereas employers/research institutes had the least impact. Supporting open science practices was the highest ranked incentive, while increasing authors’ visibility was the highest ranked motivation for publishing preprints. Conclusions Although many biomedical researchers recognize the benefits of preprints, there is still hesitation among others to engage in this practice. This may be due to the general lack of peer review of preprints and little enthusiasm from external organizations such as journals, funding agencies, and universities. Future work is needed to determine optimal ways to increase researchers’ attitudes through modifications to current preprint systems and policies.

Publisher

F1000 Research Ltd

Subject

General Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics,General Immunology and Microbiology,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3