Suppr超能文献

一项针对生物医学研究人员预印本态度的国际、横断面调查。

An international, cross-sectional survey of preprint attitudes among biomedical researchers.

机构信息

Centre for Journalology, Ottawa Methods Centre, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada.

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.

出版信息

F1000Res. 2024 Nov 4;13:6. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.143013.2. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Preprints are scientific manuscripts that are made available on open-access servers but are not yet peer-reviewed. Although preprints are becoming more prevalent, uptake is not optimal. Understanding researchers' opinions and attitudes toward preprints is valuable to optimize their use. Understanding knowledge gaps and researchers' attitudes toward preprinting can assist stakeholders, such as journals, funding agencies, and universities, to use preprints more effectively. Here, we aimed to collect perceptions and behaviours regarding preprints across an international sample of biomedical researchers.

METHODS

Corresponding authors of articles published in biomedical research journals were identified from a random sample of journals from the MEDLINE database. Their names and email addresses were extracted to invite them to our anonymous, cross-sectional survey, which asked participants questions about their knowledge, attitudes, and opinions regarding preprinting.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 730 respondents providing a response rate of 3.20% and demonstrated a wide range of attitudes and opinions about preprints with authors from various disciplines and career stages worldwide. Most respondents were familiar with the concept of preprints but most had not previously posted one. The lead author of the project and journal policy had the greatest impact on decisions to post a preprint, whereas employers/research institutes had the least impact. Supporting open science practices was the highest ranked incentive, while increasing authors' visibility was the highest ranked motivation for publishing preprints.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many biomedical researchers recognize the benefits of preprints, there is still hesitation among others to engage in this practice. This may be due to the general lack of peer review of preprints and little enthusiasm from external organizations such as journals, funding agencies, and universities. Future work is needed to determine optimal ways to improve researchers' attitudes through modifications to current preprint systems and policies.

摘要

背景

预印本是在开放获取服务器上提供但尚未经过同行评审的科学手稿。尽管预印本越来越普及,但采用率并不理想。了解研究人员对预印本的看法和态度对于优化其使用非常有价值。了解知识差距和研究人员对预印本的态度可以帮助期刊、资助机构和大学等利益相关者更有效地使用预印本。在这里,我们旨在收集国际生物医学研究人员对预印本的看法和行为。

方法

从 MEDLINE 数据库中的随机期刊样本中确定生物医学研究期刊文章的通讯作者。提取他们的姓名和电子邮件地址,邀请他们参加我们的匿名横断面调查,该调查询问参与者有关他们对预印本的知识、态度和看法的问题。

结果

730 名受访者完成了调查,回复率为 3.20%,展示了来自世界各地不同学科和职业阶段的作者对预印本的广泛态度和看法。大多数受访者熟悉预印本的概念,但大多数人以前没有发布过预印本。项目的主要作者和期刊政策对发布预印本的决定影响最大,而雇主/研究机构的影响最小。支持开放科学实践是排名最高的激励因素,而提高作者知名度是发布预印本的最高动机。

结论

尽管许多生物医学研究人员认识到预印本的好处,但其他人仍然对参与这种做法犹豫不决。这可能是由于预印本普遍缺乏同行评审,以及期刊、资助机构和大学等外部组织缺乏热情。未来需要通过修改当前的预印本系统和政策来确定通过何种最佳方式来改善研究人员的态度。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/abee/11589417/bf76b779c884/f1000research-13-173500-g0000.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验