Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More information

Sheldon 2018 Nature

From Bioblast

MitoFit Preprints         MitoFit Preprints        
Gnaiger 2019 MitoFit Preprints
Gnaiger MitoFit Preprints 2020.4
        MitoFit DOI Data Center         MitoPedia: Preprints         Bioenergetics Communications

Sheldon 2018 Nature

Publications in the MiPMap
Sheldon T (2018) Preprints could promote confusion and distortion. Nature 559:445.

» PMID: 3004254 Open Access

Sheldon T (2018) Nature

Abstract: Thousands of papers are submitted every month to the platforms arXiv and bioRxiv, which make manuscripts available before they have been peer reviewed and accepted by a journal. Scientists applaud preprints because they enable researchers to claim priority and make their findings available more quickly, unshackled from sluggish and tyrannical journals.

This might make sense within the scientific community, but as someone who has worked for years with researchers and journalists to ensure responsible coverage of science in the media, I fear that this method of publication holds substantial risks for the broader community — risks that are not being given proper consideration by the champions of preprint. Weak work that hasn’t been reviewed could get overblown in the media. Conversely, better work could be ignored. Keywords: Preprints Bioblast editor: Gnaiger E


» Fraser J, Polka J (2018) Together scientists and journalists can spot poor preprints. Nature 560:553. - »Bioblast link«
» Sarabipour S (2018) Preprints are good for science and good for the public. Nature 560:553. - »Bioblast link«
» Tennant J, Gatto L, Logan C (2018) Preprints help journalism, not hinder it. Nature 560:553. - »Bioblast link«