PNC has plaudited this: Preprints in motion: tracking changes between posting and journal publication https://t.co/D05TSzrIwU

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/wFL4mkC5Nz

@LauraDuntsch @PhDVoice @AcademicChatter Its also interesting looking at how much papers change between preprint and final version (most don't seem to change substantially, but of course peer-review will catch the worst and prevent them from being publishe

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

RT @bioprotocolbyte: Ever heard of the podcast ~Preprints in Motion~ by @JACoates? Sounds like a fun listen for our #ECR and #OpenScience e…

Ever heard of the podcast ~Preprints in Motion~ by @JACoates? Sounds like a fun listen for our #ECR and #OpenScience enthusiasts. Cofounder of @ASAPbio_ and bio-protocol author @PracheeAC just featured on their one-year episode🥳and I'm feeling intrigued

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

RT @PracheeAC: It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with…

It takes more than one person for a great conversation! @JACoates has been absolutely 🤩⭐️, pushing forward #OpenScience with his many incredible efforts to both amplify preprints (the podcast + lots more) and study them (https://t.co/VgQsLIpIV9). This was

https://t.co/f6KkcXYFfB

https://t.co/lWQ3FN9hOr

RT @StatGenDan: "We found that preprints were most often passing into the "permanent" literature with only minor changes to their conclusio…

RT @StatGenDan: "We found that preprints were most often passing into the "permanent" literature with only minor changes to their conclusio…

RT @StatGenDan: "We found that preprints were most often passing into the "permanent" literature with only minor changes to their conclusio…

"We found that preprints were most often passing into the "permanent" literature with only minor changes to their conclusions, suggesting that the entire publication pipeline is having a minimal but beneficial effect upon preprints" 1/4 https://t.co/hU3j3

@Richvn @MotionPod @JACoates Here are 3 studies showing very few changes between submission and publication: * Klein et al., 2018 https://t.co/JJr6Z28CMO * Carneiro et al., 2020 https://t.co/eAmWwoFqDL * Polka et al., 2021 https://t.co/P2lLQYofSW

True to their own conclusion, here is the biorxiv preprint of the PLoS paper [which has qualitatively similar conclusions!] https://t.co/UA0uo5HIXp https://t.co/ir4XjtsI7z

RT @JACoates: It's live! In our latest preprint we looked at how preprints change upon publication #metaresearch #preprint. So here's a lit…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's live! In our latest preprint we looked at how preprints change upon publication #metaresearch #preprint. So here's a lit…

"Moreover, the conclusions of 6% of non-COVID-19-related and 15% of COVID-19-related abstracts undergo a discrete change by the time of publication, but the majority of these changes do not reverse the main message of the paper." https://t.co/m2ydinH80n

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

RT @JACoates: It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist w…

It's finally out in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/tTzGC1Jc5p). Huge thanks to the team, reviewers, PLOS Bio & @GreeneScientist who we co-submitted with (https://t.co/KcaCjOWTpi)!

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5a8X16

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic https://t.co/VFqe5aqxSE

Preprints in Motion (https://t.co/9tGGtG0ynG) & @MotionPod https://t.co/vr3JxRR0qC

Evidence supports the relatively little contribution of peer review. We really need to reconsider the time and financial investments and if they're actually worth it. https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm

@bengoldacre Also evidence directly showing that covid preprints are comparable to their published version. Suggests that preprints are quality scientific outputs. https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm (about to be published). Additional studies linked in my piece for t

@the_Node Thanks for the shout out! That preprint (https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm) has just been accepted for publication and is a follow up to our other @PLOSBiology paper https://t.co/VM9zjUHW25

RT @JACoates: It's live! In our latest preprint we looked at how preprints change upon publication #metaresearch #preprint. So here's a lit…

RT @JACoates: It's live! In our latest preprint we looked at how preprints change upon publication #metaresearch #preprint. So here's a lit…

Just accepted for publication 🥳🍾🎉! More info when it appears in print. Did our work change significantly I wonder?😜. Also watch this space for a new project investigating those preprints that are never published! 🎉

@patlogullo See this from @2weekSR https://t.co/XpYKsanjWr

@dnunan79 I know of these two also: Klein 2019: https://t.co/P3Z9gGx9o1 (interestingly, this was from pre-pandemic) Polka 2021: https://t.co/Xvd12aebE9 We were going to do a panel on this for WorldEBHCDay 2021 but ran out of time/capacity. Very interestin

@OpenAcademics ooh I like this one! 1) Re-submitted paper following peer review this week (https://t.co/9tGGtG0ynG) And recorded for the fantastic @SpotlightThePod And our own @motionpod is doing well. Science also kinda worked... Most important, get to

And updated preprint live https://t.co/9tGGtG0ynG

If you'd like to read our work you can find it here: https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm. We asked how reliable the early COVID preprints were compared to the published literature.

RT @JACoates: @MarioFeldman9 @arjunrajlab @biorxivpreprint The evidence (that exists) looking into this would generally disagree. For examp…

@MarioFeldman9 @arjunrajlab @biorxivpreprint The evidence (that exists) looking into this would generally disagree. For example; https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm. I'm not saying replace peer review but it desparately needs reforming and fixing. More here; https://t

Starting in 15 mins 😬. Luckily the rest of my talk is much less controversial than this slide.

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

yikes!

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

RT @JACoates: Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspirac…

Sneak peak of my upcoming talk this Friday #SciWri21. Hijacking of the COVID preprint literature by right-wing and conspiracy groups. #scarystuff. Will discuss our @PLOSBiology paper (https://t.co/VM9zjUHW25) and preprint (in review) (https://t.co/TK6U5hU

Preprints in motion: tracking changes between posting and journal publication https://t.co/EBClFoKNST

"a better understanding of the difference between preprints and peer-reviewed science could still be beneficial", hmm if only somebody had looked at that....https://t.co/TK6U5iciDU (ps. we did!) https://t.co/ERBg50pzGw

@ClimateOfGavin Depends on how you quantify "a lot"? https://t.co/ASCK5fC5s2

@writeo @CT_Bergstrom @ScottGottliebMD @medrxivpreprint People have looked at the differences between preprints and published versions and typically the changes are minor - see e.g. from @JACoates https://t.co/a7I7L16KcS

@pj_saez @Ankita_13Jha @aemonten @ASAPbio_ @cshperspectives I think people should cite whatever version they read and used, since preprints do change before being published: https://t.co/JJbvrZ1vXt It makes sense also to rely on the most recent version unl

RT @JACoates: @methylnick @cshperspectives @arc_gov_au The majority of preprints that are published either don't change or don't have any m…

@methylnick @cshperspectives @arc_gov_au The majority of preprints that are published either don't change or don't have any meaningful changes. We're hoping to also investigate those that are never published and pre-pandemic. https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm

RT @JACoates: It's live! In our latest preprint we looked at how preprints change upon publication #metaresearch #preprint. So here's a lit…

RT @KeepItRheol: Thanks to all who participating in discussion re. very quick peer review! I finally consulted an expert (Jessica Lange, M…

Thanks to all who participating in discussion re. very quick peer review! I finally consulted an expert (Jessica Lange, McGill Librarian) who sent me some suggested reading: https://t.co/LwcZHNvatS https://t.co/yNn39Zsh3f https://t.co/W6ITMbaI0Q https:/

Our data (and others) suggest this is not necessarily true - we still want to assess those preprints that are never published but need funding to enable this. https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm

@BoomboomchiefsT It's a good question. I don't think any solution is perfect, but it takes up a huge amount of everyone's time. There's a neat paper showing it makes little difference to conclusions (https://t.co/DADWePDPDf). I think I would favour preprin

RT @PreprintBot: 💬 bioRxiv comment on "Preprints in motion: tracking ..." "My co-authors and I welcome additional public comments on this…

RT @GreeneScientist: First time I have seen this!

First time I have seen this!

RT @PreprintBot: 💬 bioRxiv comment on "Preprints in motion: tracking ..." "My co-authors and I welcome additional public comments on this…

💬 bioRxiv comment on "Preprints in motion: tracking ..." "My co-authors and I welcome additional public comments on this work, ideally by the end of June, 2021! #FeedbackASAP" https://t.co/SO6mKtwbjH

@snouraini @mariyav_phd @scicomm_jc It's important to note that peer review doesn't actually guarantee a paper is "high quality" or reliable. Many preprints do not change notably between posting and journal publication (though some do). https://t.co/aw7RB

And we have some evidence to underscore some of these excellent points 👉https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm

@cshperspectives @JasonSynaptic @jonathan_ploski @biorxivpreprint We had a look at around 200 that were posted Jan-april 2020 https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm. But I'd love to look wider (it's an active project) it's just I need funding and more people on board to

Adding to the growing body of evidence that preprints do not significantly differ from their published version: "Preprints in motion: tracking changes between posting and journal publication" https://t.co/C0szVEMZZD

@mbeisen We touched upon this here https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm. Figure 1. I can pull the data out to get some numbers if needed.

@IoanaA_Cristea Is the purpose of peer review more curation or more ensuring validity? Journals like PLOS ONE explicitly do not judge impact or novelty, and manuscripts usually do not change that much after undergoing peer review: https://t.co/Fl0Wwhr78d

RT @JACoates91: @TheScientistLLC Want to learn more? Then check out our recently published paper in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/VM9zjUqkDv)…

RT @JACoates91: @TheScientistLLC Want to learn more? Then check out our recently published paper in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/VM9zjUqkDv)…

@TheScientistLLC Want to learn more? Then check out our recently published paper in @PLOSBiology (https://t.co/VM9zjUqkDv) & our preprint (https://t.co/TK6U5iciDU) which both address preprints in #COVID19

Journalists have been doing a generally great job at reporting COVID - though it's clear there is still more to do (from all sides). Concerns over peer-review? Good evidence from others and us (https://t.co/TK6U5hUHMm) to suggest preprints really are compa

RT @JACoates91: We also have related work looking at how early COVID preprints change upon publication -> https://t.co/3ti57d7LnT Spoiler*…

We also have related work looking at how early COVID preprints change upon publication -> https://t.co/3ti57d7LnT Spoiler* They generally don't (Due to be submitted soon)

Amazing scientific response to COVID https://t.co/xEo8bv76lJ @VirusesImmunity @florian_krammer @CyrilPedia. Preprints feature prominently, as we have investigated indepth (https://t.co/VM9zjUHW25) and the big question, can we trust those preprints? Yes! ht

@McknightLaura @PracheeAC If only somebody looked into this...caveats apply but other work also suggests that our data is likely to be representative of the wider preprint literature https://t.co/5pN2GvaGT1

RT @JACoates91: @TIRscienceblog @PracheeAC Lots of evidence recently to show that preprints do not have less rigour by (@olavoamaral & @Gre…

RT @JACoates91: @TIRscienceblog @PracheeAC Lots of evidence recently to show that preprints do not have less rigour by (@olavoamaral & @Gre…

RT @JACoates91: @TIRscienceblog @PracheeAC Lots of evidence recently to show that preprints do not have less rigour by (@olavoamaral & @Gre…