Coates and Polkas research study discovered that 28.7 percent of COVID-19 preprints were mentioned in at least one news post, compared to 1 percent of preprints unrelated to the pandemic. According to a list kept by Retraction Watch, a total of 137 COVID-19– related manuscripts have actually been taken down by journals or preprint servers throughout the pandemic– and just 22 of those have been preprints. While most preprints never ever make it to the published literatures, some studies suggest that for those that do, there is minimal difference in the quality in between the preprint and published versions. In reaction to the growing usage of preprints, lots of financing agencies, such as The Wellcome Trust, the European Research Council, and the National Institutes of Health, have altered their policies to accept– and in some cases, encourage– the usage of preprints in grant applications. The ARCs decision to bar preprints was “the first policy that I had actually heard of from a funder that prevents the citation of preprints,” Polka states.
Coates and Polkas research study found that 28.7 percent of COVID-19 preprints were mentioned in at least one news short article, compared to 1 percent of preprints unrelated to the pandemic. In reaction to the growing usage of preprints, lots of funding agencies, such as The Wellcome Trust, the European Research Council, and the National Institutes of Health, have changed their policies to accept– and in some cases, motivate– the use of preprints in grant applications. The ARCs choice to bar preprints was “the very first policy that I had actually heard of from a funder that dissuades the citation of preprints,” Polka says.
