Leveraging Smart Citations as Preprint Commentary and Review

Organizer Josh Nicholson, co-founder and CEO of scite Website or social media links https://scite.ai/ twitter.com/scite Project duration Ongoing project Project duration Indefinitely Project aims Overview of the challenge to overcome Reviewing and curating preprints openly at scale is challenging.  The ideal outcome or output of the project Implementation of the scite Smart Citation badge (https://scite.ai/badge)…

Preprint review and curation by content type

Organizer Daniel Mietchen, School of Data Science, University of Virginia, @EvoMRI Project status ongoing Project duration ongoing Project aims Background Peer review of preprints typically has two main components (a) general comments on parameters like the quality, scope, topicality or structure of the manuscript and (b) comments on details, e.g. inaccuracies, missing references, confusing plot parameters,…

Call for proposals to encourage preprint curation and peer review

Community feedback on preprints makes rapid science more robust. Review and commentary can help authors improve their articles; curation can provide readers with helpful context and enhance discoverability. But despite the benefits, barriers to reviewing and curating preprints remain. Potential reviewers and curators see few incentives to organize and comment on preprints, and reviews can…

Welcome to Clinician’s Corner

A series aimed at opening the dialogue surrounding preprint usage in the clinical community. Run by the ASAPbio Fellows Vanessa Bortoluzzi, Kirsty Ferguson, Suraj Kannan and Aleksandra Petelski. Today, scientific discovery moves at a faster pace than even a decade ago [1]. However, the publishing process required by journals does not seem able to keep…