How did the scientific publication system respond to the Covid-19 pandemic?

Authors

  • Renan Moritz Varnier de Almeida Programa de Engenharia Biomédica COPPE- Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil image/svg+xml

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47909/ijsmc.160

Keywords:

Covid-19, publication process, peer review, preprints

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic introduced new complicating factors for the process of scientific publication, such as an unprecedented volume of article submissions. These changes have the potential to significantly alter how scientific communication is done, thus demanding scrutiny. To assess how the scientific publication system responded to the challenges brought by the Covid-19 pandemic. The following topics of interest were analyzed with the help of a review of the pertinent scientific literature: a) How were review quality and publication speed affected by the increased volume of Covid-19-related submissions; b) How were Covid-19 retraction and citation rates affected; and c) How was the scientific communication process impacted by the widespread use of “preprints” as a valid (“citable”) source of information. Concerning review quality, some extremely dubious articles on Covid-19 treatment managed to be published, some of which were in relatively prestigious journals. Regarding retractions (contrary to initial reports), no increase in retractions rate was evident as time passed and the system reached its “steady state”. As for preprints, problems associated with their use are the practice of “retracting” (withdrawing) preprints with no adequate retraction standards and how to evaluate preprint quality effectively. As a whole, the scientific publication system seems to have survived the unusual circumstances arising from the pandemic; e.g., no increase in retractions rates was observed. Problems remain to be dealt with, particularly regarding improving the peer review quality and the citation/evaluation/retracting of preprints.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abritis, A., Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2021). An “alarming” and “exceptionally high” rate of COVID-19 retractions? Accountability in Research, 28(1), 58–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1793675 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1793675

Anderson, C., Nugent, K., & Peterson, C. (2021). Academic journal retractions and the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Primary Care & Community Health, 12, 215013272110155. https://doi.org/10.1177/21501327211015592 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21501327211015592

Brainard, J. (2018). What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing’s ‘death penalty’. Science. October 25. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav8384 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav8384

Brainard, J. (2021). No revolution: COVID-19 boosted open access, but preprints are only a fraction of pandemic papers Science. September 08. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.acx9058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.acx9058

Bramstedt, K. A. (2020). The carnage of substandard research during the COVID-19 pandemic: A call for quality. Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(12), 803–807. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106494 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106494

Brierley, L. (2021). Lessons from the influx of preprints during the early COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(3), e115–e117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00011-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00011-5

Chirico, F., Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Magnavita, N. (2020). “Questionable” peer review in the publishing pandemic during the time of COVID-19: Implications for policy makers and stakeholders. Croatian Medical Journal, 61(3), 300–301. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2020.61.300 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2020.61.300

Else, H. (2020). How a torrent of COVID science changed research publishing—In seven charts. Nature, 588(7839), 553–553. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03564-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03564-y

Fang, F. C., Steen, R. G., & Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(42), 17028–17033. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109

Grieneisen, M. L., & Zhang, M. (2012). A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS ONE, 7(10), e44118. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044118

Gupta, L., Gasparyan, A. Y., Misra, D. P., Agarwal, V., Zimba, O., & Yessirkepov, M. (2020). Information and misinformation on COVID-19: A cross-sectional survey study. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 35(27), e256. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e256 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e256

Henrina, J., Lim, M. A., & Pranata, R. (2021). COVID-19 and misinformation: How an infodemic fuelled the prominence of vitamin D. British Journal of Nutrition, 125(3), 359–360. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114520002950 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114520002950

Hoy, M. B. (2020). Rise of the Rxivs: How preprint servers are changing the publishing process. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 39(1), 84–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2020.1704597 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2020.1704597

Lawson, D. O., Wang, M. K., Kim, K., Eikelboom, R., Rodrigues, M., Trapsa, D., Thabane, L., & Moher, D. (2022). Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic and recent developments on the communication of clinical trials, publishing practices, and research integrity: In conversation with Dr. David Moher. Trials, 23(1), 671. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06624-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06624-y

London, A. J., & Kimmelman, J. (2020). Against pandemic research exceptionalism. Science, 368(6490), 476–477. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc1731 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc1731

Massarani, L., & Neves, L. F. F. (2022). Reporting COVID-19 preprints: Fast science in newspapers in the United States, the United Kingdom and Brazil. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 27(3), 957–968. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232022273.20512021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232022273.20512021

Meyerowitz-Katz, G., Sekhar, P., Besançon, L., Turner, T., & McDonald, S. (2022). The citation of retracted COVID-19 papers is common and rarely critical. MedRxiv 2022.06.30.22277084 [Epidemiology]. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.30.22277084 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.30.22277084

Oransky, A. I. (2013, February 25). Is an “article in press” “published?” A word about Elsevier’s withdrawal policy. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2013/02/25/is-an-article-in-press-published-a-word-about-elseviers-withdrawal-policy/

Oransky, I. (2020a, July 28). ‘Some papers can slip through the net,’ says journal that published 5G-COVID-19 paper. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2020/07/28/some-papers-can-slip-through-the-net-says-journal-that-published-5g-covid-19-paper/

Oransky, I. (2020b, October 29). Amulets may prevent COVID-19, says a paper in Elsevier journal. (They don’t.) – Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2020/10/29/amulets-may-prevent-covid-19-says-a-paper-in-elsevier-journal-they-dont/

Oransky, I. (2021, July 02). Journal retracts paper claiming two deaths from COVID-19 vaccination for every three prevented cases. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2021/07/02/journal-retracts-paper-claiming-two-deaths-from-covid-19-vaccination-for-every-three-prevented-cases/

Peterson, C. J., Alexander, R., & Nugent, K. (2022). COVID-19 article retractions in journals indexed in PubMed. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 364(1), 127–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjms.2022.01.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjms.2022.01.014

Rieger, O. (2020, June 09). Preprints in the spotlight: Establishing best practices, building trust. APO - Analysis and Policy Observatory. https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.313288 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.313288

Santos-d’Amorim, K., Ribeiro de Melo, R., & Nonato Macedo dos Santos, R. (2021). Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: Is Academia spreading misinformation? Liinc em Revista, 17(1), e5593. https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v17i1.5593 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v17i1.5593

Sharma, K. (2020). Patterns of retractions from 1981-2020: Does a fraud lead to another fraud? arXiv:2011.13091 [cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2011.13091

Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2021). Silently withdrawn or retracted preprints related to Covid-19 are a scholarly threat and a potential public health risk: Theoretical arguments and suggested recommendations. Online Information Review, 45(4), 751–757. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0371 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0371

Tennant, J., Bauin, S., James, S., & Kant, J. (2018, May 28). The evolving preprint landscape: introductory report for the Knowledge Exchange Working Group on Preprints. APO - Analysis and Policy Observatory. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/796TU DOI: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/796tu

Ting, F. B., Remi Kandal, Daniel. (2022, September 06). Preprints: What you need to know. CanadiEM. https://canadiem.org/preprints-need-to-know/

van Schalkwyk, F., & Dudek, J. (2022). Reporting preprints in the media during the COVID-19 pandemic. Public Understanding of Science, 31(5), 608–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221077392 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221077392

Yeo-Teh, N. S. L., & Tang, B. L. (2021). An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Accountability in Research, 28(1), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1782203 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1782203

Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication

Downloads

Published

2022-12-20

How to Cite

Renan Moritz Varnier de , A. (2022). How did the scientific publication system respond to the Covid-19 pandemic?. Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.47909/ijsmc.160

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 3 (2022): Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication

Section

Opinion article

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Renan Moritz Varnier de Almeida

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0, which permits copying and redistributing the material in any medium or format, adapting, transforming, and building upon the material as long as the license terms are followed.

Funding data