Publication and Impact of Preprints Included in the First 100 Editions of the CDC COVID-19 Science Update (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Preprints are publicly available manuscripts posted to various servers that have not been peer-reviewed. Although preprints have existed since 1961, they have gained increased popularity and credibility during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the need for immediate, relevant information. OBJECTIVE The inclusion of preprints in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update, a weekly publication that provides brief summaries of new COVID-19-related studies, is an opportunity to evaluate the publication rate and impact (Altmetric Attention Score and citation count) of selected preprints and assess the performance of the Science Update to select impactful preprints. METHODS All preprints in the first 100 editions (April 1, 2020 – July 30, 2021) of the Science Update were included in the study. Preprints that were not published were categorized as “unpublished preprints”. Preprints that were subsequently published exist in two versions (in a peer-reviewed journal and on the original preprint server) which were analyzed separately and referred to as “peer-reviewed preprint” and “original preprint”, respectively. Time-to-publish was the time interval between the date on which a preprint was first posted to the date on which it was first available as a peer-reviewed article. Impact was quantified by Altmetric Attention Score and citation count for all available manuscripts on August 6, 2021. Preprints were analyzed by publication status, rate, and time to publication. RESULTS Among 275 preprints included in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update during the study period, most came from three servers: medRxiv (n=201), bioRxiv (n=41), and SSRN (n=25), with eight coming from other sources. More than half (55.3%) were eventually published. The median time-to-publish was 2.31 months (IQR 1.38-3.73). When preprints posted in the last 2.31 months were excluded (to account for the time-to-publish), the publication rate was to 67.8%. Seventy-six journals published at least one preprint from the CDC COVID-19 Science Update and 18 journals published at least three. The median Altmetric Attention Score for unpublished preprints (n=123) was 146 (IQR 22-552) and median citation count of 2 (IQR 0-8); for original preprints (n=152) these values were 212 (IQR 22-1164) and 14 (IQR 2-40), respectively. For peer-review preprints, these values were 265 (IQR 29-1896) 19 (IQR 3-101), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Prior studies of COVID-19 preprints found publication rates between 5.4% and 21.1%. Preprints included in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update were published at a higher rate than overall COVID-19 preprints, and those that were ultimately published were published within months and received higher attention scores than unpublished preprints. These findings indicate that the Science Update process for selecting preprints appears have done so with high fidelity in terms of their likelihood to be published and impactful. Incorporation of high-quality preprints into the CDC COVID-19 Science Update improves this activity’s capacity to inform meaningful public health decision making.

The publication fate of abstracts presented at the Medical Library Association conferences

Objective: We sought to determine how many abstracts presented at the 2012 and 2014 Medical Library Association (MLA) annual conferences were later published as full-text journal articles and which features of the abstract and first author influence the likelihood of future publication. To do so, we replicated a previous study on MLA conference abstracts presented in 2002 and 2003. The secondary objective was to compare the publication rates between the prior and current study.Methods: Presentations and posters delivered at the 2012 and 2014 MLA meetings were coded to identify factors associated with publication. Postconference publication of abstracts as journal articles was determined using a literature search and survey sent to first authors. Chi-squared tests were used to assess differences in the publication rate, and logistic regression was used to assess the influence of abstract factors on publication.Results: The combined publication rate for the 2012 and 2014 meetings was 21.8% (137/628 abstracts), which is a statistically significant decrease compared to the previously reported rate for 2002 and 2003 (27.6%, 122/442 abstracts). The odds that an abstract would later be published as a journal article increased if the abstract was multi-institutional or if it was research, specifically surveys or mixed methods research.Conclusions: The lower publication rate of MLA conference abstracts may be due to an increased number of program or nonresearch abstracts that were accepted or a more competitive peer review process for journals. MLA could increase the publication rate by encouraging and enabling multi-institutional research projects among its members.

A Publication Rate Comparison of Oral Communications Presented at the 2010 and 2015 French General Practice Congresses and European General Practice Network Meetings

Background and Objectives: We sought to assess and compare the publication rates of research presented at two French general practice congresses (Collège National des Généralistes Enseignants (CNGE, National College of General Practice Teachers) and Congrès de la Médecine Générale de France (CMGF [French General Practice Congress]) and the European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) meetings held in 2010 and 2015. Methods: We included all oral presentations from the 2010 and 2015 CNGE, CMGF and EGPRN meetings. We searched subsequent publications up to December 2018. We collected study themes, study designs, author qualifications, and journals for all published presentations. Results: Overall, we included 701 oral presentations; 33% of the 2010 presentations, and 30% of the 2015 presentations were subsequently published (P=.40). For both years, the overall publication rate was higher for presentations from the EGPRN meetings compared with the French meetings (55.6% vs 27.1%; P<.05). Published articles mostly concerned clinical research and quantitative methods from academic authors. Seventeen percent of articles from the EGPRN meetings were published by BMC Family Practice and the European Journal of General Practice, whereas 32% of articles from the French meetings were published by Exercer, the French Journal of General Practice. Conclusions: More than half of the presentations at the 2010 and 2015 EGRPN meetings were published, whereas the publication rate from the French meetings remained under 30%. Further efforts are needed to increase the publication rate of general practice studies in peer-reviewed international journals.

Gender Gap in Political Science: An Analysis of the Scientific Publications and Career Paths of Italian Political Scientists

ABSTRACT This article assesses whether a gender gap in political science, identified in the international literature, also is present in the context of Italian political science. The literature has mostly centered on the comparison of female publication rates in international journals with the academic workforce in the United States, but this raises an issue of data comparability. As an alternative strategy to avoid comparability biases, this study focuses on the analysis of a single national case: Italy. The article evaluates to what extent the “glass-ceiling” effect persists for political scientists who intend to publish their contributions. By analyzing data on articles published between 2015 and 2020 by the three major Italian political science journals, this contribution shows that (1) the proportion of published articles written by female authors is lower than that of male authors; (2) the hypothesis that the lower female proportion depends on a lower female presence in the field of political science is refuted; (3) there is little collaboration between men and women; (4) there is a correlation between the presence of female editors in scientific journals and the proportion of female-authored articles; and (5) gender differences are reflected in women’s academic career progression.