Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 519
Altern Lab Anim ; 50(1): 57-61, 2022 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35212234


Since the inaugural issue of ATLA, many changes within publishing have occurred, impacting when, where, and how researchers conduct literature searches for non-animal alternatives. Such changes include increased rate of growth in scientific publications, greater number of databases and online resources available to search, opportunities for open and almost immediate dissemination of research outputs such as preprints and method protocols, and the development of reporting guidelines for animal research. Here we offer a librarian's perspective on these changes and advice on how to manage them to enable robust and diverse alternatives to be implemented in future research.

Experimentación Animal , Bibliotecólogos , Animales , Humanos , Edición
Int J Gen Med ; 15: 5929-5935, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35811777


Purpose: Fever is relatively common in patients admitted to general wards. There is no standardized approach, and little is known about how physicians respond to fever. Additionally, preprinted physician orders are routinely used clinically in hospital medicine, and it is not clear how preprinted physician orders for fever affect the care of patients with fever. Therefore, we aimed to determine whether preprinted physician orders for inpatients have an effect on the time from fever measurement to blood culture collection. Patients and Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, cross-sectional study of patients with bacteremia. Between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019, 137 hospitalized febrile patients diagnosed with bacteremia by blood culture prepared from blood collected 72 h after hospitalization were included. Results: Preprinted physician orders with instructions to call the physician if the patient has a fever were present for 59 patients. For preprinted physician orders with instructions to notify the physician about fever onset, 62.7% of the blood cultures were collected within 1 h of fever observation; when preprinted orders were not used, only 23.1% met the 1-h collection criterion. Multivariate analysis showed that preprinted physician orders were significantly associated with blood culture collection within 1 h from the reporting of fever (odds ratio, 4.94; 95% confidence interval, 2.27-10.70). Conclusion: Preprinted physician orders with instructions to notify the physician about fever onset were present for only 40% of our sample, and this was related to the time of blood culture collection.

Development ; 149(14)2022 Jul 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35833838

Biol Open ; 11(7)2022 Jul 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35876380


The use of preprints, research manuscripts shared publicly before completing the traditional peer-review process, is becoming a more common practice among life science researchers. Early-career researchers (ECRs) benefit from posting preprints as they are shareable, citable, and prove productivity. However, preprinting a manuscript involves a discussion among all co-authors, and ECRs are often not the decision-makers. Therefore, ECRs may find themselves in situations where they are interested in depositing a preprint but are unsure how to approach their co-authors or advisor about preprinting. Leveraging our own experiences as ECRs, and feedback from the research community, we have constructed a guide for ECRs who are considering preprinting to enable them to take ownership over the process and to raise awareness about preprinting options. We hope that this guide helps ECRs to initiate conversations about preprinting with co-authors and encourage them to preprint their future research.

Mol Biol Cell ; 33(9): mbcP22041006, 2022 Aug 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35862498
Scientometrics ; : 1-19, 2022 Jul 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35813409


To examine the reproducibility of COVID-19 research, we create a dataset of pre-prints posted to arXiv, bioRxiv, and medRxiv between 28 January 2020 and 30 June 2021 that are related to COVID-19. We extract the text from these pre-prints and parse them looking for keyword markers signaling the availability of the data and code underpinning the pre-print. For the pre-prints that are in our sample, we are unable to find markers of either open data or open code for 75% of those on arXiv, 67% of those on bioRxiv, and 79% of those on medRxiv.

Bone Jt Open ; 3(8): 582-588, 2022 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35848996


AIMS: Preprint servers allow authors to publish full-text manuscripts or interim findings prior to undergoing peer review. Several preprint servers have extended their services to biological sciences, clinical research, and medicine. The purpose of this study was to systematically identify and analyze all articles related to Trauma & Orthopaedic (T&O) surgery published in five medical preprint servers, and to investigate the factors that influence the subsequent rate of publication in a peer-reviewed journal. METHODS: All preprints covering T&O surgery were systematically searched in five medical preprint servers (medRxiv, OSF Preprints,, PeerJ, and Research Square) and subsequently identified after a minimum of 12 months by searching for the title, keywords, and corresponding author in Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and the Web of Science. Subsequent publication of a work was defined as publication in a peer-reviewed indexed journal. The rate of publication and time to peer-reviewed publication were assessed. Differences in definitive publication rates of preprints according to geographical origin and level of evidence were analyzed. RESULTS: The number of preprints increased from 2014 to 2020 (p < 0.001). A total of 38.6% of the identified preprints (n = 331) were published in a peer-reviewed indexed journal after a mean time of 8.7 months (SD 5.4 (1 to 27)). The highest proportion of missing subsequent publications was in the preprints originating from Africa, Asia/Middle East, and South America, or in those that covered clinical research with a lower level of evidence (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preprints are being published in increasing numbers in T&O surgery. Depending on the geographical origin and level of evidence, almost two-thirds of preprints are not subsequently published in a peer-reviewed indexed journal after one year. This raises major concerns regarding the dissemination and persistence of potentially wrong scientific work that bypasses peer review, and the orthopaedic community should discuss appropriate preventive measures.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):582-588.

Preprint en Inglés | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22277529


IntroductionDue to the accelerated pace and quantum of scientific publication during the COVID-19 pandemic, a large number of articles on COVID-19 have been retracted. Pre-prints though not peer-reviewed offer the advantage of rapid dissemination of new findings. In this study, we aim to systematically compare the article characteristics, time to retraction, social media attention, citations, and reasons for retraction between retracted pre-print and peer-reviewed articles on COVID-19. MethodsWe utilized the Retraction Watch database to identify retracted articles on COVID-19 published from 1st January 2020 to 10th March 2022. The articles were reviewed and metadata such as article characteristics (type, category), time to retraction, reasons for retraction, and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation count were collected. ResultsWe identified 40 retracted pre-prints and 143 retracted peer-reviewed articles. The median (IQR) retraction time for pre-print and peer-reviewed articles was 29 (10-81.5) days and 139 (63-202) days (p = 0.0001). Pre-prints and peer-reviewed article had median (IQR) AAS of 26.5 (4-1155) and 8 (1-38.5), respectively (p = 0.0082). The median (IQR) citation count for pre-prints and peer-reviewed articles was 3 (0-14) and 3 (0-17), respectively (p = 0.5633). The AAS and citation counts were correlated for both pre-prints (r = 0.5200, p = 0.0006) and peer-reviewed articles(r = 0.5909, p = 0.0001). The commonest reason for retraction for pre-prints and peer-reviewed articles concerns about data and results. ConclusionThe increased adoption of pre-prints results in faster identification of erroneous articles compared to the traditional peer-review process.

PLoS Med ; 19(6): e1004051, 2022 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35727823

Medicina , Humanos