Preprint review and curation

A list by Mark Williams

Interesting articles related to research culture, use of preprints and their review and curation activity.

33 articles Last updated

Showing page 1 of 4

  • Mapping the preprint review metadata transfer workflows

    1. Tony Alves
    2. Christopher Erdmann
    3. Emily Esten
    4. Martin Klein
    5. Bianca Kramer
    6. Maria Levchenko
    7. Daisy Nip
    8. Michael Parkin
    9. Iratxe Puebla
    0 evaluations Published on Added on

    Part of a wider initiative to encourage wider deposit and sharing of preprint review metadata, this paper is concerned with mapping existing transfer workflows and shows how new communities might adopt a particular method to suit their process of review.

  • ‘Conditional Acceptance’ (additional experiments required): A scoping review of recent evidence on key aspects of Open Peer Review

    1. Tony Ross-Hellauer
    2. Serge P. J. M. Horbach
    0 evaluations Published on Added on

    References in this post https://theconversation.com/the-peer-review-system-no-longer-works-to-guarantee-academic-rigour-a-different-approach-is-needed-244092, suggesting that the process of Open Peer Review is 'too new to understand how it compares with traditional publishing'

  • Understanding the Publish-Review-Curate (PRC) Model of Scholarly Communication

    1. Katherine S. Corker
    2. Ludo Waltman
    3. Jonathon A Coates
    0 evaluations Published on Added on

    An overview of the PRC model and statistics relating to adoption. Sciety represents all organisations and communities offering variants of this model; curating preprints independent of review, community review and curation based on review.

  • Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science

    1. Michele Avissar-Whiting
    2. Frédérique Belliard
    3. Stefano M. Bertozzi
    4. Amy Brand
    5. Katherine Brown
    6. Géraldine Clément-Stoneham
    7. Stephanie Dawson
    8. Gautam Dey
    9. Daniel Ecer
    10. Scott C. Edmunds
    11. Ashley Farley
    12. Tara D. Fischer
    13. Maryrose Franko
    14. James S. Fraser
    15. Kathryn Funk
    16. Clarisse Ganier
    17. Melissa Harrison
    18. Anna Hatch
    19. Haley Hazlett
    20. Samantha Hindle
    21. Daniel W. Hook
    22. Phil Hurst
    23. Sophien Kamoun
    24. Robert Kiley
    25. Michael M. Lacy
    26. Marcel LaFlamme
    27. Rebecca Lawrence
    28. Thomas Lemberger
    29. Maria Leptin
    30. Elliott Lumb
    31. Catriona J. MacCallum
    32. Christopher Steven Marcum
    33. Gabriele Marinello
    34. Alex Mendonça
    35. Sara Monaco
    36. Kleber Neves
    37. Damian Pattinson
    38. Jessica K. Polka
    39. Iratxe Puebla
    40. Martyn Rittman
    41. Stephen J. Royle
    42. Daniela Saderi
    43. Richard Sever
    44. Kathleen Shearer
    45. John E. Spiro
    46. Bodo Stern
    47. Dario Taraborelli
    48. Ron Vale
    49. Claudia G. Vasquez
    50. Ludo Waltman
    51. Fiona M. Watt
    52. Zara Y. Weinberg
    53. Mark Williams
    0 evaluations Published on Added on

    A paper which the Sciety team supported through surfacing open data regarding the preprint review landscape which can be found via https://lookerstudio.google.com/reporting/b09cf3e8-88c7-4928-b639-2c48dc786191/page/p_kr9n81etoc

  • PReF: describing key Preprint Review Features

    1. Jessica Polka
    2. Iratxe Puebla
    3. Damian Pattinson
    4. Philip Hurst
    5. Gary S. McDowell
    6. Richard Sever
    7. Thomas Lemberger
    8. Michele Avissar-Whiting
    9. Philip N. Cohen
    10. Tony Ross-Hellauer
    11. Gabriel Stein
    12. Kathleen Shearer
    13. Clare Stone
    14. Victoria Tianjing Yan
    0 evaluations Published on Added on

    Each group on Sciety has a PReF table that describes their review process. This article details the features of preprint peer review and how they may differ from traditional peer review.

Next