Rezultati pretraživanja
  1. Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    Thank you for a wonderful visit and excellent seminar on the most recent trends. We had a great turnout for this important conversation on and the future of academic publishing

  2. prije 12 sati

    When in January we launched Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview w/ , we had no idea we were going to be in the midst of an outbreak of global scale in just a few days. Scientists r contributing w/ at an unprecedented speed. 🙏 help review them! ⬇️

  3. 4. velj

    I totally agree with Prachee – the current scrutiny that are getting is exactly the point!

  4. 1. velj

    Reviewing cannot be easier. In seconds you can install in your browser or work directly on the platform. It's open and it's free.

  5. I am delighted to be part of this. Will chair a session on the sustainability of Preprints and jnl-independent peer review services.

  6. Agreed. And do you know that IJQC/ offers an "under review" pre-print repositories for submitted manuscripts? (voluntary for authors). Including transparent timeline!

  7. prije 3 sata

    Quick retraction of coronavirus paper was good moment for science - STAT The risks and merits of vs trad peer review journals

  8. prije 18 sati
  9. Odgovor korisniku/ci

    It's up to us as a community to keep pushing Have you a slide deck we could use for internal purposes? I have colleagues who don't get the value of preprints. Cheers

  10. prije 20 sati
    Odgovor korisniku/ci

    It would be great to have these as on Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview, a new and open platform dedicated to the rapid review of outbreak-related . so they don't get lost on Twitter. We are happy to help if needed.

  11. prije 20 sati

    Spanish speaking friends, this is for you! Article in talking about making research freely available to accelerate research for featuring quote on by

  12. prije 23 sata

    It didn’t take a dangerous virus for some of us to recognize this danger. are inherently risky in medical contexts.

  13. Odgovor korisniku/ci

    🛑Search on 'coronavirus' = 319, 'wuhan AND coronavirus' = 36 (as of 11:19 04.02.2020) Thanks for succinct summary of 30 Now, can we slow down please? There is already too much (snakes, HIV, asymptomatics etc.)

  14. 4. velj
  15. 4. velj

    Preprint servers continue to evolve. This thread makes the point that peer review of a preprint does not equate an editorial decision - a peer reviewed preprint is not the same as an accepted article but reviewers’ notes can help journal editors.

  16. 4. velj
  17. 3. velj

    Oops: Study claiming can be transmitted by people without symptoms was flawed, tells us: It's not just ; research is moving almost as fast as the

  18. 3. velj

    I agree with the piece. The quick retraction of the "uncanny" paper shows that peer review on works, in fact in my view much better than the current system based on 2-3 anonymous peer-reviewers prior to publication

    Prikaži ovu nit
  19. 3. velj

    Based on the scientific community's collective response to a recent preprint on , we now see the true value of - "fostering scientific communication and rapid awareness of others’ work"

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.