Open access journal posts COVID-19 preprint studies to reduce misinformation

Reviewed by James Ives, M.Psych. (Editor)Aug 12 2020

Today, open access journal Rapid Reviews: COVID-19 (RR:C19), published by the MIT Press, posted peer reviews of eight COVID-19 preprint studies in an effort to reduce misinformation and to elevate noteworthy and useful research for scientists, public health officials, journalists, and the public.

These authoritative reviews cover a wide range of subjects, including:

• Neurological manifestations associated with COVID-19. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: Findings are informative for future intervention studies. Decision-makers should consider the claims in this study actionable with limitations to some methods and data.
• The effectiveness of the S1-Fc vaccine against COVID-19 live infection. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: Given the urgent need for a vaccine, this data is worth publishing, but the study has some defects, including the need for controls to enhance the quality of the study.
• One of the only large-scale, population-based national serosurveys reported to date, including seroprevalence between age groups and sociodemographic differences. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: This study of Brazilian regions makes significant contributions to our understanding of COVID-19.
• Antidepressants and the risk of death or intubation in patients with COVID-19. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: Findings suggest antidepressants may contribute to the treatment of COVID-19, but it would require extensive research to validate the claims.
• Whether younger Floridians are responsible for transmitting COVID-19 to older Floridians. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: The paper adds to existing evidence regarding transmission between age groups, but the argument is not strongly supported because of the model's simplicity and data limitations.
• A portable diagnostic platform that will enable real-time case identification and epidemiological surveillance. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: This could be an indispensable molecular diagnostic solution for COVID-19. While promising, comparisons are needed.
• Public health response and early release for incarcerated individuals. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: A worthwhile contribution that effectively lays out epidemiological, legal, and moral arguments relevant to prisons. Should be read widely.
• A study on the unprecedented role of preprints in the pandemic. Preprint | Review
  RRC19 Review Summary: Findings on the changing landscape of preprints are robust and informative, though there are some errors and misinterpretations.

COVID-19 research often outpaces traditional peer-reviewed publishing, and with more than 20,000 preprints available across a variety of preprint servers, including medRxiv, bioRxiv, and SSRN, there is an urgent need for scholarly peer review to validate--or debunk--information before it is widely circulated.

For the editorial team, led by editor-in-chief, Stefano M. Bertozzi, Professor of Health Policy and Management and Dean Emeritus of the School of Public Health at University of California Berkeley, it is gratifying to see a mix of papers that are representative of the mission of RR:C19.

One important aspect of our mission is its disciplinary inclusivity--and that is reflected in the first round of papers we have reviewed. They range from legal/bioethical perspectives to papers across the basic sciences, clinical medicine, and public health. Most of the papers are also quite recent, and thus, would have taken many more weeks to undergo peer review under more traditional models."

Stefano M. Bertozzi, Editor-in-Chief and Professor, Health Policy and Management, Dean Emeritus School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley