» Articles » PMID: 35876380

A Guide to Preprinting for Early-career Researchers

Overview
Journal Biol Open
Specialty Biology
Date 2022 Jul 25
PMID 35876380
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The use of preprints, research manuscripts shared publicly before completing the traditional peer-review process, is becoming a more common practice among life science researchers. Early-career researchers (ECRs) benefit from posting preprints as they are shareable, citable, and prove productivity. However, preprinting a manuscript involves a discussion among all co-authors, and ECRs are often not the decision-makers. Therefore, ECRs may find themselves in situations where they are interested in depositing a preprint but are unsure how to approach their co-authors or advisor about preprinting. Leveraging our own experiences as ECRs, and feedback from the research community, we have constructed a guide for ECRs who are considering preprinting to enable them to take ownership over the process and to raise awareness about preprinting options. We hope that this guide helps ECRs to initiate conversations about preprinting with co-authors and encourage them to preprint their future research.

Citing Articles

Reviewing manuscripts for scientific journals: recommendations for early career scientists.

Forero D, Glatt S, Oermann M BMC Res Notes. 2025; 18(1):17.

PMID: 39819633 PMC: 11740453. DOI: 10.1186/s13104-024-07060-8.


The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review.

Blatch-Jones A, Recio Saucedo A, Giddins B PLoS One. 2023; 18(9):e0291627.

PMID: 37713422 PMC: 10503772. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291627.


The rise of preprints in earth sciences.

Pourret O, Ibarra D F1000Res. 2023; 12:561.

PMID: 37448860 PMC: 10336359. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.133612.2.


Preprints as a driver of open science: Opportunities for Southeast Asia.

Irawan D, Zahroh H, Puebla I Front Res Metr Anal. 2022; 7:992942.

PMID: 36225341 PMC: 9548629. DOI: 10.3389/frma.2022.992942.

References
1.
Watson C . Australian funder backflips on controversial preprint ban. Nature. 2021; . DOI: 10.1038/d41586-021-02533-3. View

2.
Chiarelli A, Johnson R, Pinfield S, Richens E . Preprints and Scholarly Communication: Adoption, Practices, Drivers and Barriers. F1000Res. 2020; 8:971. PMC: 6961415. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.19619.2. View

3.
Abdill R, Blekhman R . Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints. Elife. 2019; 8. PMC: 6510536. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.45133. View

4.
Carneiro C, Queiroz V, Moulin T, Carvalho C, Haas C, Rayee D . Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020; 5(1):16. PMC: 7706207. DOI: 10.1186/s41073-020-00101-3. View

5.
Cobb M . The prehistory of biology preprints: A forgotten experiment from the 1960s. PLoS Biol. 2017; 15(11):e2003995. PMC: 5690419. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003995. View