Volume 24, Issue 5 (8-2025)
JRUMS 2025, 24(5): 490-494 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: بدون کد
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Masoudi F. Preprints: A Novel Accelerator in Scientific Publishing. JRUMS 2025; 24 (5) :490-494
URL: http://journal.rums.ac.ir/article-1-7756-en.html
URL: http://journal.rums.ac.ir/article-1-7756-en.html
Abstract: (27 Views)
Preprints, as preliminary versions of scientific articles prior to formal peer review, play a significant role in accelerating scientific dissemination and knowledge exchange. The emergence of platforms such as arXiv and bioRxiv has enabled researchers to publish their findings more rapidly and receive timely feedback, thereby fostering greater interaction, enhancing the visibility of research, and accelerating scientific progress—particularly during critical situations like the COVID-19 pandemic. However, preprints also present challenges. Uncertain quality due to the lack of peer review and the potential for unhelpful feedback are among the drawbacks. Concerns about validity and the possibility of disseminating inaccurate information have also been raised. Despite these challenges, the use of preprints is expected to continue to grow, along with the development of standards and guidelines for their evaluation and responsible use.
Keywords: Preprint, Scientific platforms, Scientific publishing, Peer review, Validation
Authors’ contributions:
- Conceptualization: Fatameh Masoudi
- Methodology: Fatameh Masoudi
- Data collection: Fatameh Masoudi
- Formal analysis: Fatameh Masoudi
- Supervision: Fatameh Masoudi
- Project administration: Fatameh Masoudi
- Writing – original draft: Fatameh Masoudi
- Writing – review & editing: Fatameh Masoudi
Keywords: Preprint, Scientific platforms, Scientific publishing, Peer review, Validation
Authors’ contributions:
- Conceptualization: Fatameh Masoudi
- Methodology: Fatameh Masoudi
- Data collection: Fatameh Masoudi
- Formal analysis: Fatameh Masoudi
- Supervision: Fatameh Masoudi
- Project administration: Fatameh Masoudi
- Writing – original draft: Fatameh Masoudi
- Writing – review & editing: Fatameh Masoudi
Type of Study: Short Report |
Subject:
Editorial
Received: 2025/06/2 | Accepted: 2025/06/3 | Published: 2025/08/19
Received: 2025/06/2 | Accepted: 2025/06/3 | Published: 2025/08/19
References
1. Tennant JP, Waldner F, Jacques DC, Masuzzo P, Collister LB, Hartgerink CHJ. The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review. F1000Res 2016; 5: 632.
2. Berg JM, Bhalla N, Bourne PE, Chalfie M, Drubin DG, Fraser JS, et al. Preprints for the life sciences. Science 2016; 352(6288): 899–901.
3. Ginsparg P. Lessons from arXiv’s 30 years of information sharing. Nat Rev Phys 2021; 3(8): 602–3.
4. Bourne PE, Polka JK, Vale RD, Kiley R. Ten simple rules to consider regarding preprint submission. PLoS Comput Biol 2017; 13(5): e1005473.
5. Xie B, Shen Z, Wang K. Is preprint the future of science? A thirty year journey of online preprint services. arXiv 2021 Feb 17. arXiv: 2102.09066.
6. Fu DY, Hughey JJ. Releasing a preprint is associated with more attention and citations for the peer-reviewed article. eLife 2019; 8:e52646.
7. Fraser N, Brierley L, Dey G, Polka JK, Pálfy M, Nanni F, et al. The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape. PLoS Biol 2021; 19(4): e3000959.
8. Pulverer B. Preparing for preprints. EMBO J 2016; 35(24): 2617–9.
9. Kowalczuk MC, Dudbridge F, Nanda S, Harriman SL, Moylan EC. Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models. BMJ Open 2015; 5(9): e008707.
10. ACS Publications. Preprints and Post Publication Peer Review: The New Age of Publishing. 2023. Available at: https://axial.acs.org/publishing/preprints-and-post-publication-peer-review-the-new-age-of-publishing. Accessed August 28, 2025.
11. Maggio LA, Costello JA, Artino AR Jr. Describing the landscape of medical education preprints on medRxiv: Current trends and future recommendations. Acad Med 2024; 99(9): 981–6.
12. Krumholz HM, Bloom T, Sever R, Ross JS. Submissions and downloads of preprints in the first year of medRxiv. JAMA 2020; 324(18): 1903–5.
13. Carneiro CFD, Queiroz VGS, Moulin TC, de Castro RC, Silva JS, Santos LV, et al. Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature. Res Integr Peer Rev 2020; 5: 16.
14. Malički M, Jerončić A, ter Riet G, Bouter LM, Ioannidis JPA, Goodman SN, et al. Preprint servers’ policies, submission requirements, and transparency in reporting and research integrity recommendations. JAMA 2020; 324(18): 1901–3.
15. Naddaf M. Preprint sites bioRxiv and medRxiv launch new era of independence. Nature 2025 Mar 11 [Epub ahead of print].
16. Soderberg CK, Errington TM, Nosek BA. Credibility of preprints: an interdisciplinary survey of researchers. R Soc Open Sci 2020; 7(10): 201520.
17. Chiarelli A, Johnson R, Pinfield S, Richens E. Preprints and scholarly communication: An exploratory study of preprint posting behavior and motivations. Quant Sci Stud 2019; 1(2): 618–46.
18. Collins FS, Stoffels P. Accelerating COVID-19 therapeutic interventions and vaccines (ACTIV): An unprecedented partnership for unprecedented times. JAMA 2020; 323(24): 2455–7.
19. Kwon D. How swamped preprint servers are blocking bad coronavirus research. Nature 2020; 581(7807): 130–1.
20. Tennant JP, Crane H, Crick T, Davila J, Enkhbayar A, Havemann J, et al. Ten hot topics around scholarly publishing. Publications 2019; 7(2): 34.
21.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
