The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Topic summary

Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning — does this still hold?

This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 116, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.
C
CFairweatherTL1Member24 Sep 2025#1

The question in the title: Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it.

I have seen LEADER (N Engl J Med, 2016) cited in support of a claim I do not think it supports, twice this month, so I would like to work through what it actually shows.

My reading is that the trial is sound for its own question and is being stretched to answer a different one. I might be wrong about that, which is why this is a topic rather than a correction.

What I would like from this discussion: someone who disagrees with me to say why, with the section of the paper they are relying on.

28 likes 10mo
NK
n.kravchenkoTL2 Moderator Solution25 Sep 2025#6

This follows post #3 rather than contradicting it.

Discussing preprints in this community: bring them in for early discussion, label them clearly as preprints, invite peer critique, and be prepared for the discussion to differ if the paper is later published differently.

10 likes 10mo
DO
dr_okonkwoTL4 Moderator25 Sep 2025#9
n.kravchenko, post #6: This follows post #3 rather than contradicting it. Discussing preprints in this community: bring them in for early discussion, label them clearly as preprints, invite peer critique, and be prepared for the discussion to differ if the paper is later published differently. Go to post
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.

Server repositories: medRxiv for medicine, bioRxiv for biology. Preprints on these servers are time-stamped and have DOIs even if they are later published elsewhere. Citing the preprint with its DOI is appropriate while noting it is unpublished.

29 likes in reply to #6 10mo
YM
y.mensahTL3Wiki editor26 Sep 2025#14

On post #10 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Server repositories: medRxiv for medicine, bioRxiv for biology. Preprints on these servers are time-stamped and have DOIs even if they are later published elsewhere. Citing the preprint with its DOI is appropriate while noting it is unpublished.

29 likes 10mo
Z
ZieglerTL3Regular28 Sep 2025#33

This follows post #30 rather than contradicting it.

Do not build anything on a preprint that you would mind rebuilding: if the preprint later changes substantially in revision or shows different results when published, your reasoning based on the preprint needs to be revised.

27 likes 10mo
DV
dr.villanuevaTL3Physician29 Sep 2025#47
diluent_watch, post #31: I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological. The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient. Go to post

How to cite a preprint: author last name, first initial, et al. Title. Server name [preprint]. Posted date. Doi. Include the server name and note that it is a preprint.

28 likes in reply to #31 10mo
JD
j.delacroixTL3Regular30 Sep 2025 · edited#57

What changes between preprint and publication: authors respond to reviewer comments, re-analyse data, correct errors found in peer review, and sometimes report different results from updated analyses. The published version is not the same as the preprint.

30 likes 10mo
V
VPoulsenTL3Regular30 Sep 2025#63
m.strand_rph, post #26: Discussing preprints in this community: bring them in for early discussion, label them clearly as preprints, invite peer critique, and be prepared for the discussion to differ if the paper is later published differently. Go to post

How to cite a preprint: author last name, first initial, et al. Title. Server name [preprint]. Posted date. Doi. Include the server name and note that it is a preprint.

32 likes in reply to #26 10mo
P
PSkarbekTL3Regular4 Oct 2025 · edited#108
j.falk, post #11: I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological. The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient. Go to post

Worth separating two things that post #104 runs together.

Unrefereed work is not worthless. A great deal of it survives review substantially unchanged. It is also the case that the version appearing in a journal frequently has different numbers, and the changes are not random — they tend to be in the direction of a smaller effect and a more careful claim.

28 likes in reply to #11 10mo

Read the full topic (116 posts)

Suggested topics

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version I have seen SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) cited in support of a…
ITLCNBBI+18 23 21k 2mo
Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing STEP 8 ( JAMA , 2022) with STEP 2 (…
PBHJEFAKGC+38 47 560 22mo
[2026 update] Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation
Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021) with SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024) and finding…
JVVNJB 2 48k 7mo
The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it
Posting this under the heading it deserves: The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024). Please read it…
NLAMDOVRV+96 119 17k 3mo
Coming back to: Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part
Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) with STEP 4 (…
GDIBDTHFBV+109 116 36k 2d

Related topics — sharing the tags preprint, needs a source, effect size

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning
On the subject in the title: Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen SELECT ( N Engl J Med , 2023) cited in support of a…
OVSLTN 2 467 4mo
Follow-up: Is "synergy" the right word for the combination data?
Is "synergy" the right word for the combination data? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I have seen SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) cited in support of a…
CLBKSS 2 41k 14mo
About the Preprints category
Unrefereed work, clearly labelled as such, with the usual caveats stated once and taken seriously. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded…
JMDONIBSP+3 7 14k 3mo
[2026 update] Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session
Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have seen STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not think it…
NVAVRJVBV+5 9 4.2k 1d
Tirzepatide molecular mass and the charge states you would expect on ESI
Tirzepatide molecular mass and the charge states you would expect on ESI Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have seen SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016) cited…
CRBEMVDTV+36 40 44k 11mo