Flattening the curve of new publications on COVID-19

Abstract

Figure 1 (A) Cumulative number of publications using the keyword COVID-19 on Medline and cumulative number of deaths worldwide plotted against the number of days since the first reported death. (B) Smoothened (non-parametric regression) growth rates of new deaths caused by COVID-19 and new publications on this topic. COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019.

Mental health research in the lower-middle-income countries of Africa and Asia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review

“…During this pandemic, journals are getting more number of submissions which are undergoing expedited review. This compromises the quality of peer review, leading to low-quality research data ( Balaphas, Gkoufa, Daly, & de Valence, 2020 ; Di Girolamo & Meursinge Reynders, 2020 ).…”

Clinical Research Redirection and Optimization During a Pandemic

“…These potential benefits, however, must be weighed against the risk of low-quality, non-peer-reviewed research fueling media-driven panic or resulting in inappropriate clinical and policy decisions based on erroneous data, which both could cause harm to individuals and compromise scientific integrity. [29][30][31][32] Even articles published in reputable journals have been retracted, including from Annals of Internal Medicine, 33 The Lancet, 34,35 and The New England Journal of Medicine. 36 A recent review reports that, despite the large number of publications, only a fraction of the published studies fulfilled the principles of evidence-based practice.…”

The ‘new normality’ in research? What message are we conveying our medical students?

“…High evidence standards together with judgement in publishing COVID-19-related studies are equally relevant. 19 Exaggeration and overreaction may seriously damage medical education in addition to the reputation of science, public health, media and policymakers. 20 It may foster disbelief that will endanger the chances of an appropriately strong and sustained COVID-19 response.…”