» Articles » PMID: 39600342

An International, Cross-sectional Survey of Preprint Attitudes Among Biomedical Researchers

Overview
Journal F1000Res
Date 2024 Nov 27
PMID 39600342
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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Background: Preprints are scientific manuscripts that are made available on open-access servers but are not yet peer-reviewed.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 optimal. Understanding researchers' opinions and attitudes toward preprints is valuable to optimize their use. Understanding knowledge gaps and researchers' attitudes toward preprinting can assist stakeholders, such as journals, funding agencies, and universities, to use preprints more effectively. Here, we aimed to collect perceptions and behaviours regarding preprints across an international sample of biomedical researchers.

Methods: Corresponding authors of articles published in biomedical research journals were identified from a random sample of journals from the MEDLINE database. Their names and email addresses were extracted to invite them to our anonymous, cross-sectional survey, which asked participants questions about their knowledge, attitudes, and opinions regarding preprinting.

Results: The survey was completed by 730 respondents providing 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 posted one. 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 improve researchers' attitudes through modifications to current preprint systems and policies.

Citing Articles

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

Ng J, Chow V, Santoro L, Armond A, Pirshahid S, Cobey K F1000Res. 2024; 13:6.

PMID: 39600342 PMC: 11589411. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.143013.2.

References
1.
Fanelli D . Do pressures to publish increase scientists' bias? An empirical support from US States Data. PLoS One. 2010; 5(4):e10271. PMC: 2858206. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010271. View

2.
Fraser N, Mayr P, Peters I . Motivations, concerns and selection biases when posting preprints: A survey of bioRxiv authors. PLoS One. 2022; 17(11):e0274441. PMC: 9632780. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274441. View

3.
Avissar-Whiting M, Belliard F, Bertozzi S, Brand A, Brown K, Clement-Stoneham G . Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science. PLoS Biol. 2024; 22(2):e3002502. PMC: 10903809. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002502. View

4.
Sarabipour S, Debat H, Emmott E, Burgess S, Schwessinger B, Hensel Z . On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective. PLoS Biol. 2019; 17(2):e3000151. PMC: 6400415. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000151. View

5.
Bai A, Jiang Y, Nguyen D, Lo C, Stefanova I, Guo K . Comparison of Preprint Postings of Randomized Clinical Trials on COVID-19 and Corresponding Published Journal Articles: A Systematic Review. JAMA Netw Open. 2023; 6(1):e2253301. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.53301. View