Research Square là gì

1. Tregenza T. Gender bias in the refereeing process? Trends Ecol Evol. 2002. August 1;17[8]:349–50. [Google Scholar]

2. Shen YA, Webster JM, Shoda Y, Fine I. Persistent Underrepresentation of Women’s Science in High Profile Journals. bioRxiv. 2018. March 8;275362. [Google Scholar]

3. Murray D, Siler K, Larivière V, Chan WM, Collings AM, Raymond J, et al. Gender and international diversity improves equity in peer review. bioRxiv. 2019. April 11;400515. [Google Scholar]

4. Royle S. Waiting to happen II: Publication lag times [Internet]. quantixed. 2015. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190412012435///quantixed.org/2015/03/16/waiting-to-happen-ii-publication-lag-times/. [cited 2019 May 31].

5. Himmelstein D. Publication delays at PLOS and 3,475 other journals. Satoshi Village [Internet]. 2015 Jun 29. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20180503071358///blog.dhimmel.com/plos-and-publishing-delays/. [cited 2019 May 31].

6. Cobb M. The prehistory of biology preprints: A forgotten experiment from the 1960s. PLoS Biol. 2017. November 16;15[11]:e2003995 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003995 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

7. World University Rankings 2019: methodology [Internet]. Times Higher Education [THE]. 2018. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191104165124///www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/world-university-rankings-2019-methodology. [cited 2019 Nov 25].

8. Lin J. Preprints growth rate ten times higher than journal articles [Internet]. Crossref. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190522083623///www.crossref.org/blog/preprints-growth-rate-ten-times-higher-than-journal-articles/. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

9. Kleinert S, Horton R. Preprints with The Lancet: joining online research discussion platforms. The Lancet. 2018. June 23;391[10139]:2482–3. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Mallapaty S. African scientists launch their own preprint repository. Nature [Internet]. 2018. June 25 Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190312102218///www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05543-w. [cited 2019 Nov 28]. [Google Scholar]

11. Levchenko M. Preprints in Europe PMC: reducing friction for discoverability [Internet]. Europe PMC Blog. 2018. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821213831///blog.europepmc.org/2018/07/preprints.html. [cited 2019 Aug 21]. [Google Scholar]

12. Joerg Heber on Twitter: “Am excited that as of today we are linking to preprints posted to @biorxivpreprint from the published article itself. This also applies to previously published papers. //t.co/1CPAMRWABh //t.co/YjFCtfPp7g”/Twitter [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128193458///twitter.com/joergheber/status/1020105070875045888. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

13. J. Am. Chem. Soc. on Twitter: "The editors’ decision is in! JACS will now consider submissions of manuscripts previously posted as preprints on @ChemRxiv. Details to follow… " / Twitter [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20180820152244///twitter.com/J_A_C_S/status/1031300824889208833. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

14. European Research Council. Main Changes Expected in the ERC Work Programme 2019 [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20180810203015///erc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/content/pages/pdf/ERC-2019-Work-Programme-main-changes.pdf. [cited 2019 Nov 26].

15. PKP and SciELO announce development of open source Preprint Server system | SciELO in Perspective [Internet]. 2018. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20180921153453///blog.scielo.org/en/2018/09/21/pkp-and-scielo-announce-development-of-open-source-preprint-server-system/. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

16. Wellcome updates open access policy to align with cOAlition S [Internet]. Wellcome. 2019. Available from: //wellcome.ac.uk/news/wellcome-updates-open-access-policy-align-coalition-s. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

17. ICMJE | Recommendations [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128174016///www.icmje.org/news-and-editorials/icmje-recommendations_annotated_dec18.pdf. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

18. Israel Science Foundation | Research Gateways | F1000Research [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128193840///f1000research.com/isf. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

19. Nakagawa S. EcoEvoRxiv launched! [Internet]. Transparency in Ecology and Evolution. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190115134549///www.ecoevotransparency.org/2019/01/14/ecoevorxiv-launched/. [cited 2019 Nov 28]. [Google Scholar]

20. John Inglis on Twitter: “Full text HTML begins rolling out across the 42,000 articles on @biorxivpreprint this week, starting with the earliest. Outcome of huge collaborative effort from @Novatechset, @highwirepress, and bioRxiv team, funded by @cziscience. Future articles will be FT 2d after posting.” / Twitter [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190529151025///twitter.com/JohnRInglis/status/1092123015385616392. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

21. AMRC on Twitter: “AMRC #OpenResearch is officially launching today! It will help participating charities maximise the value of their research investment by providing their researchers with the opportunity to publish any & all aspects of their work rapidly & cost effectively //t.co/keguIt7Ohz //t.co/gddRKMdlSS”/Twitter [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128194153///twitter.com/AMRC/status/1097782846083588097. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

22. Beilstein Archives [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190428121154///www.beilstein-archives.org/xiv/. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

23. Crystal M. It’s Our Preprint Anniversary! [Internet]. The Official PLOS Blog. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191111140059///blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/04/its-our-preprint-anniversary/. [cited 2019 Nov 28]. [Google Scholar]

24. Demain P. New Features Alert! Improvements to Adding and Grouping Works [Internet]. ORCID Blog. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128194544///orcid.org/blog/2019/04/29/new-features-alert-improvements-adding-and-grouping-works. [cited 2019 Nov 28]. [Google Scholar]

25. Springer Nature journals unify their policy to encourage preprint sharing. Nature. 2019. May 15;569:307–307. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Participating Journals & Platforms [Internet]. Research Square. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191008201413///www.researchsquare.com/journals. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

27. Frequently Asked Questions [FAQ] [Internet]. bioRxiv. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821203507///www.biorxiv.org/about/FAQ. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

28. medRxiv [Internet]. The Yoda Project. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821214815///yoda.yale.edu/medrxiv. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

29. Research outputs find a home at IndiaRxiv–IndiaRxiv [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190905143532///indiarxiv.in/research-outputs-find-a-home-at-indiarxiv/. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

30. Hoyt J. PeerJ Preprints to stop accepting new preprints Sep 30th 2019 [Internet]. PeerJ Blog. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191112120834///peerj.com/blog/post/115284881747/peerj-preprints-to-stop-accepting-new-preprints-sep-30-2019/. [cited 2019 Nov 28]. [Google Scholar]

31. Transparent review in preprints [Internet]. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191014223638///www.cshl.edu/transparent-review-in-preprints/. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

32. Sever R, Roeder T, Hindle S, Sussman L, Black K-J, Argentine J, et al. bioRxiv: the preprint server for biology. bioRxiv. 2019. November 6;833400. [Google Scholar]

33. Research Square on Twitter: “This Monday we’re celebrating 9,000 #preprints on #ResearchSquare! Browse the latest #research in your field & comment on emerging #science before it’s published //t.co/kb1Zaa9Hpy”/Twitter [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128195329/https/:/twitter.com/researchsquare/status/1198979654712995840?s=20. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

34. Research Square on Twitter: “Today we’re adding 13 more @BioMedCentral journals to #InReview including @MicrobiomeJ & Environmental Health. Opt in when you submit to 70+ journals including the entire @BMC_series. View the full list of participating journals here: //t.co/KUHjw81cVA @SpringerNature” [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191031141820//twitter.com/researchsquare/status/1189904859157422081. [cited 2019 Nov 25].

35. News from around the web [Internet]. ASAPbio. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821215354///asapbio.org/news-from-around-the-web. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

36. Tennant J, Bauin S, James S, Kant J. The evolving preprint landscape: Introductory report for the Knowledge Exchange working group on preprints. 2018 May 17. Available from: //osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/796tu/. [cited 2019 May 31].

37. Kling R, Spector LB, Fortuna J. The real stakes of virtual publishing: The transformation of E-Biomed into PubMed central. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2004;55[2]:127–48. [Google Scholar]

38. Chiarelli A, Johnson R, Pinfield S, Richens E. Practices, drivers and impediments in the use of preprints [Phase 1 report] [Internet]. 2019 May 1. Available from: //zenodo.org/record/2654832#.XPEaXNNKg_U. [cited 2019 May 31].

39. Dray S. Information Exchange Group No. 5. Science. 1966. August 12;153[3737]:694–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

40. Klein M, Broadwell P, Farb SE, Grappone T. Comparing Published Scientific Journal Articles to Their Pre-Print Versions—Extended Version. Int J Digit Libr [Internet]. 2018. February 5 Available from: //arxiv.org/abs/1803.09701. [cited 2019 May 31]. [Google Scholar]

41. Larivière V, Sugimoto CR, Macaluso B, Milojević S, Cronin B, Thelwall M. arXiv E-prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2014;65[6]:1157–69. [Google Scholar]

42. Abdill RJ, Blekhman R. Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints. Pewsey E, Rodgers P, Greene CS, editors. eLife. 2019. April 24;8:e45133 10.7554/eLife.45133 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

43. Fraser N, Momeni F, Mayr P, Peters I. The effect of bioRxiv preprints on citations and altmetrics. bioRxiv. 2019. June 22;673665. [Google Scholar]

44. Serghiou S, Ioannidis JPA. Altmetric Scores, Citations, and Publication of Studies Posted as Preprints. JAMA. 2018. January 23;319[4]:402–4. 10.1001/jama.2017.21168 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

45. 1. Fu DY, Hughey JJ. Releasing a preprint is associated with more attention and citations for the peer-reviewed article. Rodgers P, Amaral O, editors. eLife. 2019. December 6;8:e52646 10.7554/eLife.52646 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

46. Inglis J, Sever R. bioRxiv: a progress report [Internet]. ASAPbio. 2016. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821214557///asapbio.org/biorxiv. [cited 2019 Aug 21]. [Google Scholar]

47. Rapid Reviews for Rapid Outbreak Response [Internet]. Outbreak Science Blog. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128174326///blog.outbreakscience.org/rapid-reviews-for-rapid-outbreak-response/. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

48. Berlin S. If the papers don’t come to the journal. EMBO Rep. 2018. April 1;19[4]:e45911 10.15252/embr.201845911 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

49. Slavov N. Why I love preprints [Internet]. Slavov Lab. 2017. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20180828220418/web.northeastern.edu/slavovlab/blog/2017/09/28/biomedical-preprints-benefits/. [cited 2019 Aug 21]. [Google Scholar]

50. Barsh GS, Bergman CM, Brown CD, Singh ND, Copenhaver GP. Bringing PLOS Genetics Editors to Preprint Servers. PLOS Genet. 2016. December 1;12[12]:e1006448 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006448 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

51. Barrett Spencer C. H. Proceedings B 2017: the year in review. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2018. January 10;285[1870]:20172553. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

52. Advancing the sharing of research results for the life sciences [Internet]. bioRxiv. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821203542///www.biorxiv.org/about-biorxiv. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

53. Anderson K. The Tincture of Time -Should Journals Return to Slower Publishing Practices? [Internet]. The Scholarly Kitchen. 2017. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190823114127///scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/03/28/the-tincture-of-time-should-journals-return-to-slower-publishing-practices/. [cited 2019 May 31]. [Google Scholar]

54. Greene C. Why we preprint. [Internet]. Casey Greene. 2015. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20181116081712///medium.com/@greenescientist/why-we-preprint-fb3bfbcdf4ff. [cited 2019 May 31].

55. SHERPA/RoMEO—Search—Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821204015/ //www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

56. List of academic journals by preprint policy—Wikipedia [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/save///en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals_by_preprint_policy. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

57. Transpose [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821204315///transpose-publishing.github.io/#/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

58. Bishop D. Tweet [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821204445///twitter.com/deevybee/status/1127186891533639681. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

59. McKiernan EC, Schimanski LA, Nieves CM, Matthias L, Niles MT, Alperin JP. Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations [Internet]. PeerJ Inc.; 2019. April Report No.: e27638v2. Available from: //peerj.com/preprints/27638. [cited 2019 May 31]. [Google Scholar]

60. University policies and statements on hiring, promotion, and journal license negotiation [Internet]. ASAPbio. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821210111///asapbio.org/university-policies. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

61. Fernandes JD, Sarabipour S, Smith CT, Niemi NM, Jadavji NM, Kozik AJ, et al. Insights from a survey-based analysis of the academic job market. bioRxiv. 2019. October 9;796466. [Google Scholar]

62. Spiro J. SFARI supports preprints for the life sciences [Internet]. SFARI; 2016. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821212320///www.sfari.org/2016/05/20/sfari-supports-preprints-for-the-life-sciences/. [cited 2019 Aug 21]. [Google Scholar]

63. Funder policies [Internet]. ASAPbio. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821212524///asapbio.org/funder-policies. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

64. After My Application is Submitted, Can I Include a Copy or Citation of a Preprint as Post-submission Materials? [Internet]. NIH Extramural Nexus. 2018. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821212758///nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2018/03/02/post-submission-materials-can-i-include-a-copy-or-citation-of-a-preprint/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

65. Science Initiative Privacy Principles [Internet]. Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. 2018. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821212941///chanzuckerberg.com/privacy/science-privacy-principles/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

66. Sever R, Eisen M, Inglis J. Plan U: Universal access to scientific and medical research via funder preprint mandates. PLoS Biol. 2019. June 4;17[6]:e3000273 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000273 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

67. Reichmann S, Ross-Hellauer T, Hindle S, McDowell G, Lin J, Penfold N, et al. Editorial policies of many highly-cited journals are hidden or unclear [Internet]. 2019. May 5 Available from: //zenodo.org/record/3237242. [cited 2019 Nov 25]. [Google Scholar]

68. Loew LM, Staehle B. 2017. Ushers in New Editorial Board Members and More. Biophys J. 2017 January 10;112[1]:E01–2. 10.1016/j.bpj.2016.12.014 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

69. Plant Direct Journal on Twitter: “@JohnRInglis @PLOS @biorxivpreprint we have been doing it since we launched last year. . . . see for ex. //t.co/S145EODDOU”/Twitter [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128202008///twitter.com/PlantDirectJ/status/1020134027616047104. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

70. Preprints [Internet]. PLOS One. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190925025506///journals.plos.org/plosone/s/preprints. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

71. Article publication and history dates–JATS4R [Internet]. Available from: //jats4r.org/article-publication-and-history-dates. [cited 2019 Nov 28].

72. Malički M, Sarol MJ, Alperin JP. Analyzing preprints: The challenges of working with SHARE metadata [Internet]. Scholarly Communications Lab | ScholCommLab; 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190906133051///www.scholcommlab.ca/2019/09/04/preprints-challenges-part-one/. [cited 2019 Nov 25]. [Google Scholar]

73. bioRxiv API [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191111115439///api.biorxiv.org/. [cited 2019 Nov 26].

74. Peer Community In [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190923105228///peercommunityin.org/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

75. OSF Preprints [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191113184523///osf.io/preprints/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

76. Narock TW, Goldstein E. Quantifying the growth of preprint services hosted by the Center for Open Science [Internet]. Open Science Framework; 2019. April Available from: //osf.io/5fk6c. [cited 2019 May 31]. [Google Scholar]

77. We support preprints… –Let’s Accelerate Scientific Publishing In The Life Sciences! [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821215234///wesupportpreprints.wordpress.com/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

78. Read the Budapest Open Access Initiative [Internet]. Budapest Open Access Initiative. 2002. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821215658///www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

79. Open Access Subset [Internet]. PubMed Central. Available from: //web.archive.org/save///www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/tools/openftlist/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

80. Himmelstein D. The licensing of bioRxiv preprints. Satoshi Village [Internet]. 2016. December 5 Available from: //blog.dhimmel.com/biorxiv-licenses/. [cited 2019 May 31]. [Google Scholar]

81. Preprint licensing survey–ASAPbio [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821220137///asapbio.org/licensing-survey. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

82. NOT-OD-17-050: Reporting Preprints and Other Interim Research Products [Internet]. NIH. 2017. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821212644///grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-17-050.html. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

83. Hill R, Stein C. Scooped! Estimating Rewards for Priority in Science.:61. [Google Scholar]

84. Tennant JP, Crane H, Crick T, Davila J, Enkhbayar A, Havemann J, et al. Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing. Publications. 2019. June;7[2]:34. [Google Scholar]

85. Bourne PE, Polka JK, Vale RD, Kiley R. Ten simple rules to consider regarding preprint submission. PLoS Comput Biol. 2017. May 4;13[5]:e1005473 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005473 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

86. Sheldon T. Preprints could promote confusion and distortion. Available from: //www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05789-4. [cited 2019 Nov 25]. [PubMed]

87. Harkinson J. “Game-changing” study links cellphone radiation to cancer [Internet]. Mother Jones. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191029201950///www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/05/federal-study-links-cell-phone-radiation-cancer/. [cited 2019 Nov 25].

88. Stockton EGE Nick. You Need More Than Rat Tumors to Prove Phones Cause Cancer. Wired [Internet]. 2016 May 28. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190905030719///www.wired.com/2016/05/need-rat-tumors-prove-phones-cause-cancer/. [cited 2019 Nov 25].

89. Soderberg CK, Errington T, Nosek BA. Credibility of Preprints Survey Presentations. 2019 Oct 2. Available from: //osf.io/rwne8/. [cited 2019 Nov 25].

90. Blair A. Too much to know: managing scholarly information before the modern age [Internet]. Yale University Press; 2010. Available from: //www.worldcat.org/title/too-much-to-know-managing-scholarly-information-before-the-modern-age/oclc/601347978. [cited 2019 Aug 21]. [Google Scholar]

91. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ. 1997. February 15;314[7079]:498–502. 10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

92. Moher D, Naudet F, Cristea IA, Miedema F, Ioannidis JPA, Goodman SN. Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLoS Biol. 2018. March 29;16[3]:e2004089 10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

93. Sarabipour S, Debat HJ, Emmott E, Burgess SJ, Schwessinger B, Hensel Z. On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective. PLoS Biol. 2019. February 21;17[2]:e3000151 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000151 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

94. Penfold NC, Polka J. Preprints in biology as a fraction of the biomedical literature [Internet]. Zenodo; 2019. Available from: //zenodo.org/record/3256298. [cited 2019 Nov 25]. [Google Scholar]

95. Albornoz D, Chan L. Power and Inequality in Open Science Discourses. IRIS—Rev Informação Mem E Tecnol. 2018. November 12;4[1]:70–9. [Google Scholar]

96. Okune A. Decolonizing scholarly data and publishing infrastructures [Internet]. Africa at LSE. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821221035///blaogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2019/05/29/decolonizing-scholarly-data-and-publishing-infrastructures/. [cited 2019 May 31].

97. Debat H, Babini D. Plan S in Latin America: A precautionary note [Internet]. PeerJ Inc.; 2019. July Report No.: e27834v2. Available from: //peerj.com/preprints/27834. [cited 2019 Nov 28]. [Google Scholar]

98. Chambers C, Morey C, Open Science Working Group, School of Psychology/CUBRIC, Cardiff University. 2017 Survey on Open Research Practices [Internet]. 03:52 PM. Available from: //mfr.osf.io/render?url = //osf.io/dmfke/?action=download%26mode=render. [cited 2019 Aug 22].

99. VanguardSTEM [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821222639///www.vanguardstem.com/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

100. 500 Women Scientists [Internet]. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821222728///500womenscientists.org/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

101. sBotLite [@sbotlite] [Internet]. Twitter. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821222840///twitter.com/sbotlite. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

102. Anderson K. Comment on Two New Initiatives at eLife To Start the Eisen Era [Internet]. 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20190821222256///scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/08/15/two-new-initiatives-at-elife-to-start-the-eisen-era/#comment-83759. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

103. Malički M, Sarol MJ, Alperin JP. Analyzing Preprints: The challenges of working with metadata from bioRxiv [Internet]. Scholarly Communications Lab | ScholCommLab; 2019. Available from: //web.archive.org/web/20191128195811///www.scholcommlab.ca/2019/10/10/preprints-challenges-part-three/. [cited 2019 Nov 25]. [Google Scholar]

104. Clark T, Ciccarese P, Goble C. Micropublications: a semantic model for claims, evidence, arguments and annotations in biomedical communications. J Biomed Semant [Internet]. 2014. July 4;5[28]. Available from: //jbiomedsem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2041-1480-5-28. [cited 2019 August 21]. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

105. The MRC supports preprints—News and features [Internet]. Medical Research Council. 2017. Available from: //web.archive.org/save///mrc.ukri.org/news/browse/the-mrc-supports-preprints/. [cited 2019 Aug 21].

Page 2

Developments in preprinting across biomedical and life sciences since May 2018.