Resources

An overview of preprints and Medrxiv for pharma

Preprints, medRxiv, and pharma
Kwisha Shah
Written by Kwisha Shah

What are preprints and preprint servers?

A preprint server is an open-access platform where researchers can post final drafts/reports, aka preprints, of their work that is not peer-reviewed or published in a journal. Preprints speed up research dissemination, stimulate discussions, help to receive feedback from the scientific community, increase research visibility, can be cited, and can be used to show early evidence of productivity to tenure committees, future employers, and grant agencies.

Preprints can be archived, searched, and retrieved for exchange of real-time data. According to Dr. Harlan Krumholz (Cardiologist and Professor of Medicine at Yale) and Dr. Joseph Ross [Associate Professor of Medicine and Public Health at Yale and Co-director of the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) Project], one of the aims of creating such a repository is for the broader scientific community to be able to search and see preliminary work and work in progress so that repetition and duplication of work can be avoided. Additionally, research often produces negative results that are a critical component of the iterative research process. Dr. Ross says, “There is still a lot that can be learned by the scientific community from these negative studies, but they’re very difficult to publish in a peer-reviewed journal.”, and preprints provide a platform for displaying negative research for the scientific community to learn from or work towards improvement.

Are preprints and preprint servers a new development?

Preprints have long been used as a means of enabling early dissemination of research in disciplines such as physics and economics, and preprint servers have co-existed with traditional journals. In 1991, an open-access repository of electronic preprints and postprints (known as e-prints) called arXiv was established to enable rapid communication among scientists in physics and the associated disciplines. Work uploaded on arXiv is approved for posting after moderation but does not undergo peer review. RePEc, a decentralized database of working papers, preprints, journal articles, and software components in the field of economics, was launched in 1997 as a collaborative project by volunteers from several countries. Notably, the last decade has seen an explosive growth of preprint servers. There are more than 60 preprint platforms available currently [for example, bioRxiv, medRxiv, ChemRxiv, EarthArXiv, SocArXiv, Preprints (MDPI), SSRN (Elsevier), NutriXiv, SciELO Preprints, AgriXiv, etc.]. More recently, the popularity of preprints has increased during the Covid-19 pandemic because of the critical need for rapid sharing of research outputs.

Rich results on Google's SERP when searching for "preprints"

Image source:
https://www.slideshare.net/pebourne/open-sciencesome-possible-actions-by-university-leaders-on-behalf-of-researchers/8

What is medRxiv and what can it be used for?

medRxiv is a free online preprint server specifically designed to host complete but unpublished manuscripts related to the fields of medical, clinical, and public health sciences. After the introduction of bioRxiv, an open-access online repository for preprints in the life sciences, some scientists pushed for an archive meant specifically for clinical research. This led to the birth of medRxiv, a not-for-profit resource built exclusively for clinical research, i.e.,

  • systematic reviews
  • meta-analyses
  • original data and research articles
  • complete research articles with step-by-step protocols
  • clinical research design protocols
  • cost effectiveness analyses
  • full computational/mathematical research papers modelling disease prevalence and transmission
  • clinical trial results and any other prospective interventional studies with a trial ID from an internationally recognized registry and approval from an appropriate oversight body

medRxiv is not linked to any one particular journal or publisher and is not suitable for

  • narrative reviews
  • letters and editorials
  • commentaries, hypotheses, and opinions lacking data
  • laboratory protocols
  • case reports
  • dissertation theses and book excerpts
  • software announcements without detailed methods and output/application research data
  • individual research article components such as datasets, figures, and tables

What are medRxiv’s screening practices and safeguards?       

medRxiv does not accept manuscripts that have been posted elsewhere, been accepted for publication, or are already published. However, authors can submit multiple revised versions of their manuscript to medRxiv at any time until the final peer-reviewed version is published.

To allay concerns about the risks of posting unvetted scientific research, medRxiv has stringent screening protocols. When a preprint is submitted to medRxiv, the below measures are taken:

  • Screening by an external clinical scientist and an experienced clinical editor—funded by the British Medical Journal (BMJ)—to ensure its scientific nature and confirm the authors’ background and compliance with ethical standards
  • Screening to check whether it represents a complete scientific study and includes complete author declarations, conflict of interest statements, ethical approvals, funding disclosures, patient consent declarations, appropriate regulatory checklists, registration numbers and IDs in case of a clinical trial, etc.
  • Checking for plagiarism
  • Finally deciding whether to post it on the platform for the broader community to read

Once posted, articles on medRxiv cannot be removed and can be searched, indexed, and cited after they receive a digital object identifier (DOI).

If any concerns are noted at the initial screening stage, then the manuscript is checked by a medical editor who takes a closer look and reports the observations to the Leadership Council—comprising six people from the BMJ, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, and Yale University—which takes the final decision regarding problematic manuscripts to ensure that published articles would not allow room for misinterpretation or put public health at risk in any way. For such cases, the Council decides that the manuscript should undergo peer review and not be hosted on medRxiv. This screening process is typically complete within 4-5 days.

Moreover, the quality of research is not evaluated at medRxiv and nor are preprints reviewed as at a journal, i.e., they do not undergo editing, peer review, or typesetting in any form. medRxiv therefore has a clear label that preprints should not be used to guide clinical practice and a prominent note to journalists that any of the findings, methods, conclusions, etc. mentioned in the preprints should not be reported as established facts: “Caution: Preprints are preliminary reports of work that have not been certified by peer review. They should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.” Such practices are necessary as the repercussions of posting inaccurate or unverified work can be more far reaching in the medical domain than in other disciplines, as mentioned by Richard Sever (Assistant Director at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and Co-founder of bioRxiv and medRxiv).

Are preprints being used in pharma?

Preprints are gradually being accepted in the pharmaceutical industry and there has been a rise in industry-authored preprints. However, it is true that pharmaceutical companies are still wary of the green open access route of publishing. Their concerns include data misinterpretation and off-label misuse, losing the competitive edge, getting scooped, general misuse of information resulting in a risk for patients, and smearing of one company’s work posted in a preprint to promote rival studies/drugs/compounds, to name a few. A session on preprints at the recent Virtual 17th Annual ISMPP Meeting offers more insights into these concerns. Nevertheless, according to John Inglis (Executive Director at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and Co-founder of bioRxiv and medRxiv), “The medical community has become aware of and hopefully has begun to learn about the value of this mode of communication.” He hopes that as more researchers accept and use preprints and the media and journalists learn how to report such information, preprints may prove more beneficial in dealing with future health emergencies.

About the author

Kwisha Shah

Kwisha Shah

Kwisha Shah is Senior Content Associate, Thought Leadership, at Cactus Life Sciences.

Leave a Comment