"We find that preprints on bioRxiv are being read more than ever before and that the rate of preprints being posted has increased to a recent high of more than 2,100 per month."
RT @microdudley: How fitting. A large analysis of the trends in pre-prints submitted to bioRxiv, and the manuscript is submitted as a pre-…
RT @SowmyaSwaminat1: From @richabdill and @blekhman comes this phenomenally rich analysis of outcomes and usage trends for BioRxiv preprint…
From @richabdill and @blekhman comes this phenomenally rich analysis of outcomes and usage trends for BioRxiv preprints. Delighted to see @SciReports @NatureComms @NatureGenet and @naturemethods in the list of 30 journals!
RT @alex_lercher: The number of preprints explodes, 90% of #bioRxiv articles are published within a year and downloads correlate with impac…
The number of preprints explodes, 90% of #bioRxiv articles are published within a year and downloads correlate with impact factor - trend or the future of publishing #science? @biorxivpreprint @NatureNews https://t.co/qhDC0GCk5l and https://t.co/DZDimIuP
How fitting. A large analysis of the trends in pre-prints submitted to bioRxiv, and the manuscript is submitted as a pre-print to bioRxiv! Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/dfffomkjrh
@TomRees_MedEd @OxPharmaGenesis @_OpenPharma This is last week’s analysis of all bioRxiv that I mentioned during the talk, from @richabdill https://t.co/cqetLFEqNq #ismppeu19
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/SH9t8iBheF
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
''Two-thirds of the preprints posted on bioRxiv in or before 2016 were later published in peer-reviewed journals, most within six months of their initial posting to the site''. Just one of the arguments (but a good one!)
RT @figshare: Where do Preprints from @biorxivpreprint end up being published? https://t.co/vzKVLFbg83 https://t.co/HtdpfJcKFV
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @PlantEvolution: Very proud about @eLife being #2 when it comes to publishing biology’s #preprints. (With total # of published papers mu…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
RT @EricTopol: The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a sum…
The remarkable impact of @biorxivpreprint's 1st 30,000 preprints https://t.co/inESUI5GeZ by @JoshuaLearn1 @NatureNews a summary of @RichardAbdill and @blekhman's great preprint (w/ even more data): https://t.co/38YuOtyMWm https://t.co/sMcLo4kVNN
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
A very nice compilation of journals publishing #preprints ! More journals should make use of @biorxivpreprint !
RT @PlantEvolution: Very proud about @eLife being #2 when it comes to publishing biology’s #preprints. (With total # of published papers mu…
Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/YtsV19HvQt
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
Glad for the journal teams, but the default #ggplot2 colours (or any continuous palette) do a bad job with discrete data. I can't tell whether palaeontology or neuroscience does well in Scientifc Reports!
RT @PlantEvolution: Very proud about @eLife being #2 when it comes to publishing biology’s #preprints. (With total # of published papers mu…
RT @PlantEvolution: Very proud about @eLife being #2 when it comes to publishing biology’s #preprints. (With total # of published papers mu…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @irynakuchma: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints @biorxivpreprint https://t.co/2RuwqYyEnu
Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints @biorxivpreprint https://t.co/2RuwqYyEnu
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @richabdill: 1/ Thrilled to finally share the project we've been working on: https://t.co/rTpq6Y54qP, a website for sorting bioRxiv #pre…
Want to know if you sill get in a "top tier" journal see the reaction to a pre-print?
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @BoyleLab: Cool to see @mbiojournal leading the pack. https://t.co/ST7ZXpL7no
Just the info I was wondering about!
RT @biorxivpreprint: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/IUVBZBxeu4 #bioRxiv
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
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 @biorxivpreprint: Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints https://t.co/IUVBZBxeu4 #bioRxiv
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 @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 @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
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 @BoyleLab: Cool to see @mbiojournal leading the pack. https://t.co/ST7ZXpL7no
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
Is this @biorxivpreprint throwing just a lil shade? https://t.co/CZbDClhCwM https://t.co/a5607hwrUh
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @DmitriKotov: Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficien…
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
Very cool analysis. Paper shows that 2/3 of preprints eventually get published so reading bioRxiv preprints is an efficient way to get a 166 day head start on reading the literature over just reading published papers.
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
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 @cshperspectives: Worth comparing to @clathrin numbers for t to publication in general, which I often show in talks https://t.co/QwNPjkV…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @CancerConnector: Would love to see these colored by IF. General trend is longer median for higher IF, but some interesting ones outside…
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @dgmacarthur: Alternative title: wtf, @NatureGenet? https://t.co/WVDfZYeMT9
RT @cshperspectives: Worth comparing to @clathrin numbers for t to publication in general, which I often show in talks https://t.co/QwNPjkV…
RT @cshperspectives: Worth comparing to @clathrin numbers for t to publication in general, which I often show in talks https://t.co/QwNPjkV…
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…
RT @BoyleLab: Cool to see @mbiojournal leading the pack. https://t.co/ST7ZXpL7no
RT @mmw_lmw: Tracking bioRxiv #preprints | Interval from bioRxiv posting to date first published elsewhere: Median 166 days, 90% within 1 y…