Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun 5;21(1):117.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01304-y.

Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic

Lonni Besançon  1   2 , Nathan Peiffer-Smadja  3   4 , Corentin Segalas  5 , Haiting Jiang  6 , Paola Masuzzo  7 , Cooper Smout  7 , Eric Billy  8 , Maxime Deforet  9 , Clémence Leyrat  5   10
Affiliations

Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic

Lonni Besançon et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

In the last decade Open Science principles have been successfully advocated for and are being slowly adopted in different research communities. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic many publishers and researchers have sped up their adoption of Open Science practices, sometimes embracing them fully and sometimes partially or in a sub-optimal manner. In this article, we express concerns about the violation of some of the Open Science principles and its potential impact on the quality of research output. We provide evidence of the misuses of these principles at different stages of the scientific process. We call for a wider adoption of Open Science practices in the hope that this work will encourage a broader endorsement of Open Science principles and serve as a reminder that science should always be a rigorous process, reliable and transparent, especially in the context of a pandemic where research findings are being translated into practice even more rapidly. We provide all data and scripts at https://osf.io/renxy/ .

Keywords: COVID-19; Methodology; Open science; Peer review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Outline of the publication process with its potential issues and our proposed solutions
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution of conflicts of interest according to the type of article for COVID-19 research articles with a submission-to-acceptance time of a day or less, 16 days and 20 days. COI: conflict of interest. Note: for fairness of comparison, we restricted our analysis to articles submitted before 11th July 2020, since it was the last submission date at which an acceptance time of 20 days could be observed
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Proportion of arXiv preprints shared in the media, broken down by research topic
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
A summary of our findings and proposed solutions
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Digital Science. (2018-) Dimensions [Software]. https://app.dimensions.ai. (2018, accessed 20 July 2020).
    1. Glasziou PP, Sanders S, Hoffmann T. Waste in covid-19 research. BMJ. 2020;369:m1847. - PubMed
    1. Retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers. https://retractionwatch.com/retracted-coronavirus-covid-19-papers/. (2020, accessed 20 July 2020).
    1. Yeo-Teh NSL, Tang BL. An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Accountability Res. 2020:1–7. 10.1080/08989621.2020.1782203. PMID: 32573274. - PubMed
    1. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. The Lancet. 2009;374(9683):86–9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60329-9. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types