@nephromythri If you want more info.. We did a research comparing citations among final and preprint versions of some research works! Here is the link https://t.co/UB9XmN2dSI
Our article 'Publication rate and citation counts for preprints released during the COVID-19 pandemic: the good, the bad and the ugly' was one of the top 5 most viewed articles published in @thePeerJ journal in 2021!
Our article on publication rate of preprints released during the COVID-19 pandemic was one of the top 5 most viewed #EvidenceBasedMedicine and #ScienceMedicalEducation articles published in @thePeerJ in 2021! https://t.co/6zb5sXKjMe @e_teran_ec @bryannicolalde1
@anatoliafergus Okay, fine, if nothing I say is valid based on...being forty-something and disabled?...okay, sure, whatevs, weird hill etc etc.
Here's citations:
1. https://t.co/qfgBNPm3Rc
2. https://t.co/dGiikxAubc
Oops. So...facts literally don't care about your #QAnonsense cultfeelings.
“Our findings show that preprints had a significantly lower scientific impact, which might suggest that some preprints have lower quality and will not be able to endure peer-reviewing processes to be published in a peer-reviewed journal. “ https://t.co/jxNDvUMsCd
@EuropePMC_news @CrossrefOrg @ORCID_Org @PeerCommunityIn @outbreaksci @preLights @GrowKudos @biomodels @MetaboLights @PGSCatalog @PANGAEAdataPubl @EMDB_EMPIAR Congrats! Just to remember readers that very few of those preprints get finally published, so be careful using them ....
https://t.co/njWeZLr4oY
ARTICLE: https://t.co/lCiY88fTew "our findings show that preprints had a significantly lower scientific impact, which might suggest that some preprints have lower quality and will not be able to endure peer-reviewing processes to be published in a peer-reviewed journal."
Publication rate and citation counts for preprints released during the COVID-19 pandemic: the good, the bad and the ugly [PeerJ] https://t.co/iYtdzQXABX