The evolving role of preprints in scholarly publishing for life sciences

By Kojo Ahiakpa, Godwyns Onwechukwa, Funmilayo Doherty, Aneyo Idowu & Ravichandra Mondreti

What are preprints?

Preprints are preliminary versions of research papers (manuscripts) that researchers share on public platforms or servers before undergoing a formal peer review process. They allow scientists to rapidly communicate their findings to the scientific community, promoting open and collaborative discussions. Preprints enable researchers to receive feedback from peers, refine their work, and foster early dissemination of important scientific discoveries.

 

History and evolution of preprints

Preprints have a long history dating back to the 17th century when the early concept of pre-publication sharing began among scientists exchanging letters. The idea of preprints was revived by the Information Exchange Group (IEG) of the National Institute of Health (NIH) in 1961. Prior to this, other scholars and researchers circulated their manuscripts in informal networks for their peers to provide feedback particularly in Physics and Mathematics. However, it wasn't until the digital era that preprints truly emerged. The NIH took it a step further by by creating a subscription system for preprints; and by 1965, there were over 3000 researchers from 46 countries signed up on the NIH subscription based-preprint system. In the 1990s, as internet access expanded, the first preprint servers appeared online like arXiv, RePEc and PubMed Central. In 1991, arXiv was created using an automated email circulation system. This allowed global sharing of work quickly prior to formal publication. Fields like physics, economics and mathematics widely adopted the practice.

 

 

However, between 2010-2013, preprints grew significantly with the founding of new preprint servers by various organisations. This included AgriXiv, SocArXiv and bioRxiv among others serving different domains. A key milestone was in 2013 when the public library of science (PLOS) endorsed sharing preprints to accelerate dissemination of research findings. This helped establish preprints as a formal phase within the publishing process.

 

Recent years have seen exponential growth, particularly in life sciences. The COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated the trend as preprints provided a solution for fast reporting of critical science. Major platforms like medRxiv and PeerJ Preprints now host thousands of preprints monthly. Preprint referenced in published articles also increased dramatically to over 50,000 citations in 2021. Thus, these events ensured mainstream integration of preprints in transforming research ecosystems. They are not only accelerating sharing of findings, but also enabling new impact metrics, peer review workflows and discovery tools for stakeholders across academia.

 

The benefits of preprints

1. Open access and sharing of knowledge: Preprints facilitate the swift sharing of research findings, allowing scientists to disseminate their work without the delays associated with traditional publishing timelines. This promotes the timely exchange of knowledge and accelerates scientific progress. Preprints are typically freely available to anyone with internet access. This open access nature ensures that scientific findings are accessible to a wider audience, including researchers, students, and the general public, fostering transparency and democratising knowledge.

 

2. Collaboration and feedback: Preprints encourage collaboration and constructive feedback from the scientific community. Researchers can receive valuable input, suggestions, and critiques, enhancing the quality of their work before formal peer review. Preprints establish an early record of scientific discoveries, allowing researchers to stake their claim to a particular idea or finding.

 

3. Complementing traditional peer review: Preprints are not intended to replace the traditional peer review process but rather complement it. While preprints allow for rapid dissemination of research, they are considered preliminary findings and undergo subsequent peer review for formal publication in academic journals. Preprints provide an opportunity for researchers to receive early feedback and improve their work before formal peer review, enhancing the quality and impact of the final published paper.

 

4. Open science and data sharing: Preprints align with the principles of open science, promoting transparency and accessibility of research findings. In addition to the preprint manuscripts, researchers often share accompanying data, methodologies, and supplementary materials, fostering reproducibility and data sharing. This open approach encourages collaboration, promotes scientific rigour, and allows other researchers to build upon existing work.

 

5. Early career researchers’ visibility: Preprints provide a platform for early career researchers to showcase their work and gain visibility within the scientific community. As traditional publishing can be time-consuming, preprints offer a way for researchers to share their findings quickly, potentially leading to collaborations, recognition, and career advancement.

 

6. Rapid response to emerging issues: In rapidly evolving fields, such as infectious diseases, preprints have proven particularly valuable. During public health emergencies or outbreaks such as the recent devastating COVID-19 pandemic, researchers swiftly shared their findings through preprints, enabling timely dissemination of critical information. This rapid response helps inform public health strategies, policy decisions, and further research.

 

7. Preprints and media coverage: Preprints have gained attention from the media, with journalists increasingly monitoring preprint servers for breaking research news. While this can help disseminate scientific information to a broader audience, it is important to note that preprints are not peer-reviewed and should be interpreted with caution. Journalists and the public should look for subsequent peer-reviewed publications for more robust and validated scientific findings.

 

8. Diversity of research topics: Preprints cover a wide range of research topics, including basic and applied sciences, clinical studies, social sciences, and interdisciplinary research. This diversity ensures that preprints serve as a platform for various scientific disciplines, encouraging cross-pollination of ideas and collaborations between different fields (https://plos.org/open-science/preprints/).

 

 

Prominent preprint servers for life sciences

1. bioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/) is operated by Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory, one of the most widely used preprint servers in the life sciences. It covers various disciplines, including biology, genetics, bioinformatics, and neuroscience.

 

2. medRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/) was launched by Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory, and specialises in preprints related to health sciences and clinical research. It serves as a platform for disseminating early-stage research on topics such as epidemiology, public health, and medical interventions.

 

3. ChemRxiv (https://chemrxiv.org/) is managed by Cambridge Open Engage, focuses on preprints in the field of chemistry. It enables chemists to share their research findings, methodologies, and data before formal publication.

 

4. arXiv (https://arxiv.org/) is one of the oldest and most well-known preprint servers, primarily focused on physics, mathematics, computer science, and related disciplines. It has expanded to include areas such as quantitative biology, statistics, and electrical engineering.

 

5. bioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/) is operated by Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory, is a prominent preprint server for the life sciences. It covers a wide range of topics, including biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and neuroscience.

 

6. medRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/) is managed by Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory, medRxiv specialises in preprints related to health sciences and clinical research. It includes studies on epidemiology, public health, medical interventions, and other topics relevant to healthcare.

 

7. PsyArXiv (https://psyarxiv.com/) is a preprint server for psychological research. It covers various subfields within psychology, including cognitive, social, developmental, clinical, and neuroscience.

 

8. EarthArXiv (https://eartharxiv.org/) is a preprint server dedicated to earth sciences, including geology, geophysics, atmospheric science, oceanography, and climate research.

 

9. AgriXiv (https://agrixiv.org/) is a preprint server for agricultural and related sciences. It covers topics such as crop science, animal science, agricultural economics, and sustainable agriculture.

You may access a list of currently available preprint repositories here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preprint_repositories

While preprints have gained popularity and acceptance in the scientific community, they are not without their criticisms.

 

Common criticisms against preprints

1. Lack of peer review: One of the main criticisms against preprints is that they undergo minimal or no formal peer review before being made publicly available. This means that the quality and validity of the research findings may not be assessed rigorously. Without peer review, there is a potential risk of flawed or erroneous information being disseminated.

 

2. Misinterpretation and miscommunication: Preprints are often shared in their raw form, without the context or clarifications provided through the peer review process. This can lead to misinterpretation of the findings by readers who may not have the necessary expertise to properly evaluate the research. In some cases, preprints have been misused or misrepresented in media reports, leading to confusion or misinformation.

 

3. Lack of accountability: Preprints do not have the same level of accountability as formally published articles. Researchers may be less inclined to thoroughly validate their work or address potential flaws if they know their findings will be made publicly available without peer review. This can result in the dissemination of incomplete or unverified research.

 

4. Risk of overhyping or scooping: Preprints can generate significant attention and media coverage, potentially leading to premature public perception and hype around certain findings. This can create a competitive environment where researchers rush to publish their work as preprints in order to establish priority or claim credit for discoveries, potentially hindering collaboration and undermining the rigour of the scientific process.

 

5. Ethics: Preprints can raise ethical concerns, particularly in sensitive research areas such as clinical trials or studies involving human subjects. The lack of peer review and oversight may result in the premature release of research that could have ethical implications or harm public trust.

 

It's important to note that many of these criticisms are mitigated through subsequent peer review and the eventual publication of research in reputable journals. Preprints serve as a valuable means of rapid communication and early dissemination of research, but they should be interpreted with caution and in the context of ongoing scientific discourse. Researchers and readers alike should exercise critical thinking and consider preprints as part of the evolving scientific publishing and communication landscape.

To ensure accountability and transparency in preprints, several steps are being taken. Here are some strategies that preprint servers are implementing to address these concerns:

1. Clear disclosure of author information: Authors are required provide clear and transparent information about their affiliations, funding sources, and any potential conflicts of interest. This helps readers to understand the context and potential biases associated with the research and promotes accountability.

 

2. Standardised reporting guidelines: Researchers are required adhere to standardised reporting guidelines specific to their field when preparing preprints. These guidelines, such as those provided by organisations like the EQUATOR Network, help ensure comprehensive and transparent reporting of research methods, results, and limitations.

 

3. Responsible interpretation and communication: Authors are required to clearly communicate the preliminary findings of their research and understand that it is done in the absence of formal peer review. They help to avoid making exaggerated claims or drawing conclusions beyond what the data supports. Additionally, media outlets and science communicators should exercise caution and accurately represent the limitations and uncertainties associated with preprints when reporting on them.

 

4. Encouraging open dialogue and feedback: Preprints should to be seen as opportunities for open dialogue and constructive feedback. Authors should actively engage with readers, respond to comments, and consider feedback to improve their work. This can help identify potential flaws, limitations, or areas that require further investigation.

 

5. Post-publication peer review and commentary: Several platforms and journals provide avenues for post-publication peer review and commentary on preprints. Researchers can voluntarily submit their preprints for formal peer review and benefit from the expertise of the scientific community in evaluating their work. Platforms such as PubPeer and journals that offer post-publication peer review can contribute to enhancing the quality and accountability of preprints.

 

6. Version control and updates: Preprint servers are implementing clear version control mechanisms, allowing authors to update their preprints and indicate changes made. This helps readers access the most recent version and understand how the research has evolved over time.

 

7. Ethics and research integrity: Researchers should ensure that their preprints adhere to ethical guidelines and research integrity standards. This includes obtaining necessary ethical approvals for studies involving human subjects or sensitive data and clearly reporting any potential ethical implications of the research.

 

8. Collaboration and community engagement: Researchers can actively collaborate with peers, participate in online scientific community engagements, and seek feedback from a diverse range of experts. This fosters a culture of accountability, transparency, and continuous improvement in preprints.

 

9. Journal submission and formal peer review: Researchers should consider submitting their preprints to reputable peer-reviewed journals. The formal peer review process provides an additional layer of scrutiny, feedback, and validation for the research. Most journals that accept preprints publish the peer-reviewed version with a link to the preprint.

 

By implementing these measures, researchers and preprint servers promote accountability, transparency, and responsible use of preprints, ensuring that they effectively contribute to the scientific discourse while maintaining the highest standards of research integrity.

 

Best Practices for Authors in Depositing their Works as Preprints

1. Choose the right preprint server: Researchers should carefully consider which preprint server is most appropriate for their field and research, as different servers may have different focus, submission guidelines, policies, and communities.

 

2. Consider journal policies: When submitting to a journal, authors should carefully review the journal's policies on preprints to ensure they are in compliance and understand any implications for their publication.

 

3. Maintain version control: Authors should be diligent about updating their preprints with any revisions or corrections, and clearly labeling each version to ensure transparency and traceability.

3. Engage with the community: Actively seeking and responding to feedback from the community can help authors improve their work and build connections with potential collaborators. Review this list of academic publishers by preprint policy here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_publishers_by_preprint_policy

 

Concluding remarks

Preprints have become an increasingly important part of scholarly publishing, offering researchers faster dissemination, increased visibility, and new collaborative opportunities. In the field of life sciences, preprint servers have played a significant role in advancing scientific discourse and accelerating the pace of discoveries. Their open and collaborative nature has fostered a culture of knowledge sharing, enabling researchers to receive feedback, establish priority, and promote transparency. As preprints continue to gain recognition and acceptance, they are poised to shape the future of scientific communication and collaboration in the life sciences and beyond.

The debate around preprints as "citable" works or "grey literature" is settled now as journals and preprints have implemented quality control and preservation to meet the evolving role of journals. Researchers should carefully consider best practices when sharing their work as preprints, including choosing the right platform, maintaining version control, and engaging with the community. The preprint ecosystem is expected to continue evolving, with quality assurance and policy development, as well as opportunities for innovative applications and broader access to scholarly information. As the scientific community continues to embrace preprints, it is essential to maintain a balance between open sharing and the rigorous peer review process to ensure the dissemination of reliable and validated scientific knowledge.