Topic summary

Preprint servers and what screening they do

Evidence › Preprints preprint effect size needs a source

This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 107, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

LeitermanTL3Regular21 Dec 2025#5

Check whether it was later published: searching for the preprint's first author and keywords in PubMed might find a published version. The published version is the stronger citation if it exists.

32 likes 7mo

r.coelhoTL2 Moderator31 Dec 2025#12

Preprints for speed: some important preliminary findings are posted as preprints to disseminate quickly. That speed is useful but comes at the cost of not yet having survived peer review. The trade-off is real.

28 likes 7mo

eire_readerTL2Regional · IE15 Jan 2026#25

footnote_entry, post #15: Always label it as a preprint in any discussion. A preprint is not a published trial and it is not settled knowledge. Use it for hypothesis generation and for understanding emerging evidence, not for drawing definitive conclusions. Go to post

How to cite a preprint: author last name, first initial, et al. Title. Server name [preprint]. Posted date. Doi. Include the server name and note that it is a preprint.

29 likes in reply to #15 6mo

p.marchettiTL2 Moderator21 Jan 2026#31

s.beaulieu, post #20: Discussing preprints in this community: bring them in for early discussion, label them clearly as preprints, invite peer critique, and be prepared for the discussion to differ if the paper is later published differently. Go to post

Unrefereed work is not worthless. A great deal of it survives review substantially unchanged. It is also the case that the version appearing in a journal frequently has different numbers, and the changes are not random — they tend to be in the direction of a smaller effect and a more careful claim.

31 likes in reply to #20 6mo

no.silvaTL2 Moderator30 Jan 2026#40

desiccant_notes, post #3: On the opening post — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification. Server repositories: medRxiv for medicine, bioRxiv for biology. Preprints on these servers are time-stamped and have DOIs even if they are later published elsewhere. Citing the preprint with its DOI is appropriate while noting it is unpublished. Go to post

How to cite a preprint: author last name, first initial, et al. Title. Server name [preprint]. Posted date. Doi. Include the server name and note that it is a preprint.

32 likes in reply to #3 6mo

k.marchandTL2 Moderator4 Feb 2026#45

no.silva, post #40: How to cite a preprint: author last name, first initial, et al. Title. Server name [preprint]. Posted date. Doi. Include the server name and note that it is a preprint. Go to post

Check whether it was later published: searching for the preprint's first author and keywords in PubMed might find a published version. The published version is the stronger citation if it exists.

32 likes in reply to #40 6mo

n.norgaardTL2 Moderator6 Mar 2026#79

post #78 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Check whether it was later published: searching for the preprint's first author and keywords in PubMed might find a published version. The published version is the stronger citation if it exists.

33 likes 5mo

n.serranoTL2 Moderator16 Mar 2026#91

Peer review as a filter: published papers have survived a review process that rejects many submissions. Preprints have not. Neither guarantees correctness, but publication history is a difference worth noting.

32 likes 4mo

BBramleyTL3Regular24 Mar 2026 · edited#101

30 likes 4mo

Read the full topic (107 posts)

This topic was referenced in

When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say soEvidence › Preprints · 160 replies

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — what changed since Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size needs a source On the subject in the title: A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021). Please read it…	+3	7	125	8mo
Coming back to: Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint Under review Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) with STEP 4 (…	+109	116	36k	2d
When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — a second dataset Evidence › Preprints preprint risk of bias needs a source Solved When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — a second dataset I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I have seen SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med ,…	+20	24	36k	14mo
Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version Evidence › Preprints risk of bias preprint effect size Posting this under the heading it deserves: Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing STEP 8 ( JAMA , 2022) with STEP 2 (…	+38	47	560	22mo
[2026 update] Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation Evidence › Preprints needs a source effect size preprint risk of bias Closed Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021) with SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024) and finding…		2	48k	7mo

Related topics — sharing the tags preprint, effect size, needs a source

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Levothyroxine timing: a real interaction with a simple fix Practice › Interactions needs a source metformin hypoglycaemia delayed gastric emptying Levothyroxine timing: a real interaction with a simple fix Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Reporting something rather than asking about it, in case the…	+20	24	60k	18mo
Regression to the mean in progress reports Research Methods › Statistics number needed to treat heterogeneity confounding effect size On the subject in the title: Regression to the mean in progress reports Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2019). Please read it before posting; the discussion…	+30	34	49k	12mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version Evidence › Preprints needs a source effect size risk of bias Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version I have seen SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) cited in support of a…	+18	23	21k	2mo
AOD-9604 and the fragment hypothesis, revisited Compounds › Other compounds mislabelling research use only custom synthesis needs a source Posting this under the heading it deserves: AOD-9604 and the fragment hypothesis, revisited Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) with SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med…	+40	44	2.8k	6mo
BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — a second dataset Compounds › Repair & healing peptides TB-500 preprint observational data needs a source Solved On the subject in the title: BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2019)…	+77	84	54k	11mo