I'm looking for a suggestion, for a medical journal counter part to the arxiv. A minimal frill, open access online repository to time stamp articles with some visibility.

  • 3
    Given how concerned doctors can be about the risks of confusing the public by circulating papers before peer review, I doubt the medical community would support anything like the arXiv. (But I don't know enough to give a definitive answer.) There are certainly open access repositories for published papers, such as PubMed Central, but that's different. – Anonymous Mathematician Oct 10 '14 at 14:32
  • @AnonymousMathematician yes, as you point out that is different. The main concern here is one of claiming intellectual ownership (time stamping the research result) – user189035 Oct 10 '14 at 14:36
  • You can get a time stamp with any regular blog, or sites like Researchgate. Now for visibility in medicine, you won't get much without publishing in a peer-reviewed well-ranked journal. This being said, there are medicine-related papers on the arxiv. – Cape Code Oct 10 '14 at 14:52
  • If it's intellectual property you're looking at, what you need is a patent. – Cape Code Oct 10 '14 at 14:53
  • 2
    If it's specifically the time stamp you want, rather than public visibility, see academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23367/… – Nate Eldredge Oct 10 '14 at 14:57

medRxiv: a preprint server for health sciences. https://www.medrxiv.org/

| improve this answer | |
  • 4
    This is the correct answer today. The preprint serve medRxiv was launched in June 2019, several years after the question was asked here. – konrad Mar 25 at 5:17

To elaborate on the answer by ddiez: bioRxiv has been deliberately designed to fill the same sort of role for life sciences that arXiv does for physics, math, and computer science. A key reason for this is the growing recognition amongst some practitioners in these fields that scientific communication is being inhibited by the long time to publication and pre-publication secrecy that is typical in life science fields---it is not uncommon to be hearing privately about work for years before one is able to read the details or cite it. Overall, this is a very good thing: it improves communication, it reduces the chance of being "scooped," and it reduces the "all-or-nothing" pressure associated with targeting super-high-impact journals.

That said, bioRxiv is still fairly new, and the conventions for its relationship with journals are still evolving. Some journals are very supportive and encourage authors to deposit in bioRxiv. Others still tightly embrace the prior publication culture and consider deposit in a preprint repository a prior publication that precludes submission. Check carefully what the policy of the journals that you are targeting with before you make a decision about whether to deposit.

| improve this answer | |
  • Note that this answer has been obsoleted by the launch of medRxiv, as noted in the newer answer. – jakebeal Mar 25 at 21:01

I am not aware of a "pre-print" (I don't mean this term in a derogatory manner) repository for medical research similar to arXiv. I think there are two reasons for this. The first is that my understanding is that the peer review process in medical fields often takes less than a month and rarely more than a year where as in Physics and Maths I think the pattern is reversed. The second reason, and I believe the most important reason, is that medical research studies should be preregistered. The 2013 Declaration of Helsinki states:

Every research study involving human subjects must be registered in a publicly accessible database before recruitment of the first subject.

This requirement has lead to initiatives (or possible vice versa) of trial repositories like bioMed Central where protocols can be peer reviewed and published. While this is very different from arXiv which archives complete studies, it may provide the type of "time stamping" you are looking for.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Unfortunately, preregistering a clinical trial doesn't mean that the trial outcomes (i.e., the resulting research paper) will be freely accessible. – Franck Dernoncourt Nov 9 '16 at 2:55
  • @FranckDernoncourt the OP was not asking for open access, but rather a timestamp with some visibility. – StrongBad Dec 28 '17 at 18:01
  • I see. The question is a bit unclear then as currently stated imho. (I had upvoted your answer btw, it's a great one, my comment was just aimed for readers not familiar with the topic) – Franck Dernoncourt Dec 28 '17 at 18:12

The closest would be bioRxiv.

| improve this answer | |

How about PeerJ Preprints? It was launched in 2013.

PeerJ Preprints is the 'pre-print' area of PeerJ. Similar to pre-print servers that already exist (for example arXiv.org), authors can submit draft, incomplete, or final versions of articles they are working on. ... PeerJ Preprints will only accept submissions in the same subject areas as PeerJ (Biological and Medical Sciences) and PeerJ Computer Science.

| improve this answer | |


A lot of academic medical professionals are uploading pre- and post-publication manuscripts to https://www.researchgate.net/

EDIT: Above answer was all there was at the end of 2017. However, since June 2019, medRxiv.org fully serves the needs of the medical science community.


| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.