RT @cshperspectives: Interesting plot - but there’s a false equivalence since a substantial number of papers go from bioRxiv to PlosOne and…
RT @cshperspectives: Interesting plot - but there’s a false equivalence since a substantial number of papers go from bioRxiv to PlosOne and…
Interesting plot - but there’s a false equivalence since a substantial number of papers go from bioRxiv to PlosOne and SciReports https://t.co/6jruMktcTH
RT @mkjolly15: Analysis of bioRxiv preprints: # of submissions, # of downloads, IF of journals that published them. Now, >2100/ month prepr…
#preprints are awesome!
Very cool bit of meta-research tracking preprint destinations (and published as a preprint, no less!). https://t.co/GNDQbzorWB
Personally I like biorxiv because I can read and assess scientific works without caring about any of this stuff.
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @npscience: Community review of the #rxivist preprint about @biorxivpreprint stats 2013-late 2018 by @dhimmel @devangm with @alchemytoda…
RT @richabdill: 1/ Thrilled to finally share the project we've been working on: https://t.co/rTpq6Y54qP, a website for sorting bioRxiv #pre…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
https://t.co/uYQNNqebFa A preprint on preprints.
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
Community review of the #rxivist preprint about @biorxivpreprint stats 2013-late 2018 by @dhimmel @devangm with @alchemytoday on @biOverlay #asapbio #preprints
RT @alchemytoday: Interesting discussion on this preprint from @blekhman and @richabdill — reviewers @dhimmel and @drdevangm brought up man…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @alchemytoday: Interesting discussion on this preprint from @blekhman and @richabdill — reviewers @dhimmel and @drdevangm brought up man…
RT @alchemytoday: Interesting discussion on this preprint from @blekhman and @richabdill — reviewers @dhimmel and @drdevangm brought up man…
Interesting discussion on this preprint from @blekhman and @richabdill — reviewers @dhimmel and @drdevangm brought up many points that didn’t come up in the twitter discussion around the preprint when it came out
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
RT @biOverlay: New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDo…
New #biOverlay: https://t.co/9dXUUjff0m AE: @alchemytoday Reviewers: @dhimmel & @drdevangm Preprint: https://t.co/jCk4kDoqmy https://t.co/R7YkVUhOQr
#Genomics & #bioinformatics preprints are downloaded more than 1 million tones per month. Bioinformatics is the second-largest category of preprints on @biorxivpreprint. See the publication here https://t.co/AxsbSIjy6W
RT @PEMelton: Tracking popularity and outcome of articles published in biorxiv https://t.co/4biE1PjSln
Tracking popularity and outcome of articles published in biorxiv https://t.co/4biE1PjSln
RT @joshuawkho: What an interesting analysis of bioRxiv preprints. It is nice to see so many #bioinformatics and #genomics manuscripts are…
What an interesting analysis of bioRxiv preprints. It is nice to see so many #bioinformatics and #genomics manuscripts are now posted on bioRxiv.
~ 65% of bioRxiv pre-prints are published in peer-reviewed journals since 2013 but they are anyway well-cited. There are 2000 new preprints every month. https://t.co/Nrt5ouEhfA
@andy_utoronto Oh, found it. Quote: "...find that two-thirds of bioRxiv preprints posted in 2016 or 30 earlier were later published in peer-reviewed journals, and that the majority of published 31 preprints appeared in a journal less than six months after
"Almost 2/3 of the papers uploaded were later published in peer-reviewed journals, the majority within 6 months of posting on the server. Preprints with most downloads are more likely to be downloaded in journal with highest impact factor." https://t.co/nT
Link: https://t.co/HGfGKHZ8Ay
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
RT @NetanyaSpencer: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/0V5cxEN8B9
This is probably longer than the majority of papers. There are many factors that contributed to the delay. We posted the manuscript as soon as we thought it was ready for publication. Journals disagreed. https://t.co/XMTTJDM9ty
RT @IowaMSTP: "two-thirds of bioRxiv preprints posted in 2016 or earlier were later published in peer-reviewed journals" https://t.co/Ko1yx…
"two-thirds of bioRxiv preprints posted in 2016 or earlier were later published in peer-reviewed journals"
Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/0V5cxEN8B9
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
RT @HenriquesLab: This! 👇 https://t.co/ia8yZ1vaLd
This! 👇
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
@TraverHart
RT @DavidGDrubin: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to as…
Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints | bioRxiv - but why use the discredited impact factor to assess journals if this is an attempt to do something meaningful with bibliometrics? See @DORAssessment https://t.co/6pXmDfsJ09
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @richabdill: 1/ Thrilled to finally share the project we've been working on: https://t.co/rTpq6Y54qP, a website for sorting bioRxiv #pre…
link to bioRxiv analysis paper here: https://t.co/yrcdRpahKF
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
@OdedRechavi @dkjhaunc @JJ_Emerson There’s a 6 month gap on average across fields and journals (https://t.co/eAOAGxlZV1). That means, most likely, that most preprints are posted after submission but before acceptance.
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/qMLUZYZ9lf It's a preprint about preprints...two thirds were later published in peer-reviewed journals, mostly less than 6 months after being posted
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @EdwardTufte: Good detailed graphic, note long tails: "Tracking popularity/outcomes all bioRxiv preprints" Richard J. Abdill, Ran Blekhm…
RT @EdwardTufte: Good detailed graphic, note long tails: "Tracking popularity/outcomes all bioRxiv preprints" Richard J. Abdill, Ran Blekhm…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
90% published within one year would appear to be a very important statistic #preeps
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @EdwardTufte: Good detailed graphic, note long tails: "Tracking popularity/outcomes all bioRxiv preprints" Richard J. Abdill, Ran Blekhm…
@jdieramon
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @EpiEllie: Some food for though, #datavizbook #epibookclub https://t.co/5QmAHWnfV3
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
Great example of how visualization drives the story that your audience hears! Often "standard" tools like simple histograms and boxplots can confuse things.
RT @EdwardTufte: Good detailed graphic, note long tails: "Tracking popularity/outcomes all bioRxiv preprints" Richard J. Abdill, Ran Blekhm…
RT @blekhman: Wow, @EdwardTufte likes our #dataviz. I think I can retire happily now :) cc @richabdill https://t.co/7GH79lPuXz
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…
RT @editor_traceyd: --> GENETICS & G3 journals the fastest two on this list - this is no accident thanks to editors & reviewers & to autho…