BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-5 (2021)

Abstract
Over recent years, the research community has been increasingly using preprint servers to share manuscripts that are not yet peer-reviewed. Even if it enables quick dissemination of research findings, this practice raises several challenges in publication ethics and integrity. In particular, preprints have become an important source of information for stakeholders interested in COVID19 research developments, including traditional media, social media, and policy makers. Despite caveats about their nature, many users can still confuse pre-prints with peer-reviewed manuscripts. If unconfirmed but already widely shared first-draft results later prove wrong or misinterpreted, it can be very difficult to “unlearn” what we thought was true. Complexity further increases if unconfirmed findings have been used to inform guidelines. To help achieve a balance between early access to research findings and its negative consequences, we formulated five recommendations: consensus should be sought on a term clearer than ‘pre-print’, such as ‘Unrefereed manuscript’, “Manuscript awaiting peer review” or ‘’Non-reviewed manuscript”; Caveats about unrefereed manuscripts should be prominent on their first page, and each page should include a red watermark stating ‘Caution—Not Peer Reviewed’; pre-print authors should certify that their manuscript will be submitted to a peer-review journal, and should regularly update the manuscript status; high level consultations should be convened, to formulate clear principles and policies for the publication and dissemination of non-peer reviewed research results; in the longer term, an international initiative to certify servers that comply with good practices could be envisaged.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1186/s12910-021-00667-7
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,295
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Times as Abstractions.Ulrich Meyer - 2011 - In Adrian Bardon (ed.), The Future of the Philosophy of Time. Routledge. pp. 41--55.
Why Does Time Pass?Bradford Skow - 2012 - Noûs 46 (2):223-242.
Clocks and the Passage of Time.Roger Teichmann - 1995 - The Monist 78 (2):189-206.
Tenseless Times.Joshua Rasmussen - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (12):3221-3227.
Le Temps. [REVIEW]C. C. V. - 1956 - Review of Metaphysics 10 (2):368-368.
The Physics of Timelessness.Varanasi Ramabrahmam - 2018 - Cosmos and History 14 (2):74-115.
Where Times Meet.Theodore R. Schatzki - 2005 - Cosmos and History 1 (2):191-212.
Time and Propositions in Jerónimo Pardo.Paloma Pérez-Ilzarbe - 2000 - In I. Angelelli & P. Pérez-Ilzarbe (eds.), Medieval and Renaissance Logic in Spain. G. Olms. pp. 54--251.
Where Times Meet.Theodore R. Schatzki - 2006 - Cosmos and History : The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 1 (2):191-212.
Inconsistency in the A-Theory.Nicholas J. J. Smith - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 156 (2):231 - 247.
Taking Times Out: Tense Logic as a Theory of Time.Thomas Pashby - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 50:13-18.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-07-29

Total views
2 ( #1,409,012 of 2,448,705 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #302,846 of 2,448,705 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes