Effect and Reach of Medical Articles Posted on Preprint Servers During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jung YEG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7653533 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Effect and Reach of Medical Articles Posted on Preprint Servers During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Jung Ye Eun Grace YEG Sun Yifei Y Schluger Neil W NW
JAMA internal medicine 20210301 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study aimed to analyze the content of data availability statements (DAS) and the actual sharing of raw data in preprint articles about COVID-19. The study combined a bibliometric analysis and a cross-sectional survey. We analyzed preprint articles on COVID-19 published on medRxiv and bioRxiv from January 1, 2020 to March 30, 2020. We extracted data sharing statements, tried to locate raw data when authors indicated they were available, and surveyed authors. The authors were surveyed in 2020-2021. We surveyed authors whose articles did not include DAS, who indicated that data are available on request, or their manuscript reported that raw data are available in the manuscript, but raw data were not found. Raw data collected in this study are published on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/6ztec/). We analyzed 897 preprint articles. There were 699 (78%) articles with Data/Code field present on the website of a preprint server. In 234 (26%) preprints, data/code sharing statement was reported within the manuscript. For 283 preprints that reported that data were accessible, we found raw data/code for 133 (47%) of those 283 preprints (15% of all analyzed preprint articles). Most commonly, authors indicated that data were available on GitHub or another clearly specified web location, on (reasonable) request, in the manuscript or its supplementary files. In conclusion, preprint servers should require authors to provide data sharing statements that will be included both on the website and in the manuscript. Education of researchers about the meaning of data sharing is needed.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11192-022-04346-1.
| S-EPMC8956135 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Preprint servers, such as arXiv and bioRxiv, have disrupted the scientific communication landscape by providing rapid access to research before peer review. medRxiv was launched as a free online repository for preprints in the medical, clinical, and related health sciences in 2019. In this review, we present the uptake of preprint server use in nephrology and discuss specific considerations regarding preprint server use in medicine. Distribution of kidney-related research on preprint servers is rising at an exponential rate. Survey of nephrology journals identified that 15 of 17 (88%) are publishing original research accepted submissions that have been uploaded to preprint servers. After reviewing 52 clinically impactful trials in nephrology discussed in the online Nephrology Journal Club (NephJC), an average lag of 300 days was found between study completion and publication, indicating an opportunity for faster research dissemination. Rapid review of papers discussing benefits and risks of preprint server use from the researcher, publisher, or end user perspective identified 53 papers that met criteria. Potential benefits of biomedical preprint servers included rapid dissemination, improved transparency of the peer review process, greater visibility and recognition, and collaboration. However, these benefits come at the risk of rapid spread of results not yet subjected to the rigors of peer review. Preprint servers shift the burden of critical appraisal to the reader. Media may be especially at risk due to their focus on "late-breaking" information. Preprint servers have played an even larger role when late-breaking research results are of special interest, such as during the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Coronavirus disease 2019 has brought both the benefits and risks of preprint servers to the forefront. Given the prominent online presence of the nephrology community, it is poised to lead the medicine community in appropriate use of preprint servers.
| S-EPMC8011003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in health professionals facing unprecedented challenges and changes in practice. Responding to humanitarian crises involves saving lives and reducing suffering and as such, palliative care is an essential component of the response to COVID-19. This study aimed to explore health professionals' perspectives of the role of palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic by analyzing their views and experiences expressed in articles and blogs located via Twitter.MethodQualitative content analysis of 33 online articles and blogs written by health professionals from 1 February 2020 to 30 June 2020. Online articles and blogs were included if the URL was posted on Twitter. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guided data collection and reporting.ResultsThe health professionals whose viewpoints were analyzed were from Europe, North America, Oceania and Asia. The themes derived from content analysis were (a) the recognized value of palliative care during the pandemic, (b) positioning palliative care as every health professional's responsibility and (c) specialist palliative care supporting and guiding health professionals.ConclusionsThis study utilizes a unique approach to exploring the perspectives of health professionals from several countries during a global pandemic. The study emphasizes the value of palliative care and identifies gaps in end-of-life care provision including resource allocation. This brings to light the urgent need to equip all health professionals with palliative care knowledge and skills, including discussing and planning care. Specialist palliative care teams are well placed to support health professionals to provide quality care.
| S-EPMC8246124 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7656281 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe concept of standard of care (SoC) treatment is commonly utilized in clinical trials. However, in a setting of an emergent disease, such as COVID-19, where there is no established effective treatment, it is unclear what the investigators considered as the SoC in early clinical trials. The aim of this study was to analyze and classify SoC reported in randomized controlled trial (RCT) registrations and RCTs published in scholarly journals and on preprint servers about treatment interventions for COVID-19.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study. We included RCTs registered in a trial registry, and/or published in a scholarly journal, and/or published on preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv (any phase; any recruitment status; any language) that aim to compare treatment interventions related to COVID-19 and SoC, available from January 1, 2020, to October 8, 2020. Studies using "standard" treatment were eligible for inclusion if they reported they used standard, usual, conventional, or routine treatment. When we found such multiple reports of an RCT, we treated those multiple sources as one unit of analysis.ResultsAmong 737 unique trials included in the analysis, 152 (21%) reported that SoC was proposed by the institutional or national authority. There were 129 (18%) trials that reported component(s) of SoC; the remaining trials simply reported that they used SoC, with no further detail. Among those 129 trials, the number of components of SoC ranged from 1 to 10. The most commonly used groups of interventions in the SoC were antiparasitics (62% of the trials), antivirals (57%), antibiotics (31%), oxygen (17%), antithrombotics/anticoagulants (14%), vitamins (13%), immunomodulatory agents (13%), corticosteroids (12%), analgesics/antipyretics (12%). Various combinations of those interventions were used in the SoC, with up to 7 different types of interventions combined. Posology, timing, and method of administration were frequently not reported for SoC components.ConclusionMost RCTs (82%) about treatment for COVID-19 that were registered or published in the first 9 months of the pandemic did not describe the "standard of care" they used. Many of those interventions have, by now, been shown as ineffective or even detrimental.
| S-EPMC9205140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The time it takes for a completed manuscript to be published traditionally can be extremely lengthy. Article publication delay, which occurs in part due to constraints associated with peer review, can prevent the timely dissemination of critical and actionable data associated with new information on rare diseases or developing health concerns such as Zika virus. Preprint servers are open access online repositories housing preprint research articles that enable authors (1) to make their research immediately and freely available and (2) to receive commentary and peer review prior to journal submission. There is a growing movement of preprint advocates aiming to change the current journal publication and peer review system, proposing that preprints catalyze biomedical discovery, support career advancement, and improve scientific communication. While the number of articles submitted to and hosted by preprint servers are gradually increasing, there has been no simple way to identify biomedical research published in a preprint format, as they are not typically indexed and are only discoverable by directly searching the specific preprint server websites. To address this issue, we created a search engine that quickly compiles preprints from disparate host repositories and provides a one-stop search solution. Additionally, we developed a web application that bolsters the discovery of preprints by enabling each and every word or phrase appearing on any web site to be integrated with articles from preprint servers. This tool, search.bioPreprint, is publicly available at http://www.hsls.pitt.edu/resources/preprint.
| S-EPMC4957174 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePreprints have had a prominent role in the swift scientific response to COVID-19. Two years into the pandemic, we investigated how much preprints had contributed to timely data sharing by analyzing the lag time from preprint posting to journal publication.ResultsTo estimate the median number of days between the date a manuscript was posted as a preprint and the date of its publication in a scientific journal, we analyzed preprints posted from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 in the NIH iSearch COVID-19 Portfolio database and performed a Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis using a non-mixture parametric cure model. Of the 39,243 preprints in our analysis, 7712 (20%) were published in a journal, after a median lag of 178 days (95% CI: 175-181). Most of the published preprints were posted on the bioRxiv (29%) or medRxiv (65%) servers, which allow authors to choose a subject category when posting. Of the 20,698 preprints posted on these two servers, 7358 (36%) were published, including approximately half of those categorized as biochemistry, biophysics, and genomics, which became published articles within the study interval, compared with 29% categorized as epidemiology and 26% as bioinformatics.
| S-EPMC9636814 | biostudies-literature
Project description:First humanoid coronavirus was discovered in the middle of 1960s, the class of viruses are considered to be a huge threat. The first onset of human coronavirus, SARS (SARS-CoV) appeared in 2003 which spanned five continents having lethal effects on human population accompanied by The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus in 2012 with a death rate of 35%. The viruses remain a threat till date and are of serious concern since no vaccine or specified drug therapy has been approbated for treating human coronaviruses. The viruses became a pandemic worldwide with the emergence of Wuhan coronavirus (2019-nCoV). SARS-CoV2 viral manifestation poses a serious human life risk by causing acute lung injury and various respiratory outcomes and has become a global concern. High pathogenicity and transmission rate of the viral strain has become the spotlight of research community throughout the world. With the ongoing studies on viral structure and host interactions, the intricacy of the viral proteome structure and replication cycle proposes a need to explore our understanding of host factors playing role in viral multiplication cycle. This review provides insight into our prevalent perception of coronavirus-host interactions, structure of SARS-CoV2, receptor mediated entry of virus inside the human cells, ongoing clinical trials, drug therapies and treatments that are being used to combat COVID-19 targeting viral fusion, replication and its multiplication.
| S-EPMC7237921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:All aspects of medical education were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Several challenges were experienced by trainees and programs alike, including economic repercussions of the pandemic; social distancing affecting the delivery of medical education, testing, and interviewing; the surge of patients affecting redeployment of personnel and potential compromises in core training; and the overall impact on the wellness and mental health of trainees and educators. The ability of medical teams and researchers to peer review, conduct clinical research, and keep up with literature was similarly challenged by the rapid growth in peer-reviewed and preprint literature. This article reviews these challenges and shares strategies that institutions, educators, and learners adopted, adapted, and developed to provide quality education during these unprecedented times.
| S-EPMC7772576 | biostudies-literature