References
- Rennie D, Flanagin A. Three decades of peer review congresses. J Am Med Assoc. 2018;319(4):350–353.
- Palayew A, Norgaard O, Safreed-Harmon K, et al. Pandemic publishing poses a new COVID-19 challenge. Nat Hum Behav. 2020;4(7):666–669.
- Mehra MR, Desai SS, Ruschitzka F, et al. RETRACTED: hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis. Lancet. 2020. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31180-6
- Mehra MR, Desai SS, Kuy S, et al. Cardiovascular disease, drug therapy, and mortality in COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(25):e102.
- AMWA‒EMWA‒ISMPP joint position statement on the role of professional medical Writers. 2017. [cited 2017 Nov 27]. Available from: http://journal.emwa.org/writing-better/amwa-emwa-ismpp-joint-position-statement-on-the-role-of-professional-medical-writers/.
- bioRxiv. Advancing the sharing of research results for the life sciences. bioRxiv. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/about-biorxiv.
- medRxiv. Submit your article to bioRxiv, an online archive and distribution service for preprints in the life sciences. medRxiv. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/submit-a-manuscript.
- Preprints.org. How it works. preprints.org. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://www.preprints.org/how_it_works#screen.
- Levchenko M. Preprints in Europe PMC: reducing friction for discoverability. Europe PMC. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: http://blog.europepmc.org/2018/07/preprints.html.
- Iwema CL, LaDue J, Zack A, et al. bioPreprint: a discovery tool for cutting edge, preprint biomedical research articles. F1000Res. 2016;5:1396. [version 2; referees: 2 approved].
- Abdill RJ, Blekhman R. Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints. Elife. 2019;8:e45133.
- Fraser N, Momeni F, Mayr P, et al. The relationship between bioRxiv preprints, citations and altmetrics. Quant Sci Stud. 2020;1(2):618–638.
- Gertel A. The data economy | rush to publication – what do we have to lose? Med Writ. 2020;29(2):14–15. Available from: https://journal.emwa.org/the-data-economy/rush-to-publication-what-do-we-have-to-lose/.
- Maslove DM. Medical preprints-a debate worth having. J Am Med Assoc. 2018;319(5):443–444.
- Penfold NC, Polka JK. Technical and social issues influencing the adoption of preprints in the life sciences. Shafee T, ed. PLoS Genet. 2020;16(4):e1008565.
- F1000Research. About F1000Research | how it works | beyond a research journal. F1000Research. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://f1000research.com/about.
- Wiley. Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions. Author guidelines. Wiley. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/1522726x/homepage/forauthors.html.
- Bell GP, Kvajo M. Tackling waste in publishing through portable peer review. BMC Biol. 2018;16(1):146
- Taylor & Francis. Article transfers – author services. Taylor & Francis. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/peer-review/transfers/.
- Wiley. Free format submission. Wiliey. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/Prepare/free-format-submission.html.
- Tennant JP, Ross-Hellauer T. The limitations to our understanding of peer review. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020;5(1):6.
- Battisti WP, Wager E, Baltzer L, et al. Good publication practice for communicating company-sponsored medical research: GPP3. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(6):461–464.
- ICMJE. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. ICMJE. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/. Published 2019.
- Matcham J, Julious S, Pyke S, et al. Proposed best practice for statisticians in the reporting and publication of pharmaceutical industry-sponsored clinical trials. Pharm Stat. 2011 Jan-Feb; 10(1):70–73.
- COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics. Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers (English). 2017. Available from: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers.
- The Editors of the Lancet Group. Learning from a retraction. Lancet. 2020;396(10257):1056.
- Jacobs A. Adherence to the CONSORT guideline in papers written by professional medical writers. Med Writ. 2010;19(3):196–200.
- Gattrell WT, Hopewell S, Young K, et al. Professional Medical writing support and the quality of randomised controlled trial reporting: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(2):e010329.
- Bailey M. Science editing and its effect on manuscript acceptance time. J Am Med Writ Assoc. 2011;26:147–152.
- Hamilton CW, Gertel A, Jacobs A, et al. Mythbusting medical writing: Goodbye, ghosts! Hello, Help! Account Res. 2016;23(3):178–194.
- Woolley KL, Ely JA, Woolley MJ, et al. Declaration of medical writing assistance in international peer-reviewed publications. Fifth Int Congr Peer Rev Biomed Publ Chicago. 2006;296(8):932–934.
- Breugelmans R, Barron JP. The role of in-house medical communications centers in medical institutions in nonnative English-speaking countries. Chest. 2008;134(4):883–885.
- Manring MMM, Panzo JA, Mayerson JL. A framework for improving resident research participation and scholarly output. J Surg Educ. 2014;71(1):8–13.
- Woolley KL, Lew RA, Stretton S, et al. Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27(6):1175–1182.
- Chipperfield L, Citrome L, Clark J, et al. Authors' submission toolkit: a practical guide to getting your research published. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(8):1967–1982.
- The EQUATOR Network | Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of Health Research. 2020. [cited 21 Sep 2020]. Available from: https://www.equator-network.org/.