Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Servidores de preprints en ciencia× | Compartición de Datos y Ciencia Abierta× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo | Ética de la publicación | Ética de la publicación |
| Familia | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Año de origen≠ | 1991 | 2010 |
| Autor original≠ | Paul Ginsparg (arXiv, 1991); Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (bioRxiv, 2013); NIH (medRxiv, 2019) | Open science movement; Center for Open Science; funding agencies (NIH, EU, NSF) |
| Tipo≠ | Platform | Framework |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Björk, B. C., Welling, P., Laakso, M., Majlender, P., Hedlund, T., & Guðnason, G. (2010). Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009. PLOS ONE, 5(6), e11273. DOI ↗ | Open Science Framework (2023). OSF. Center for Open Science. link ↗ |
| Alias | Preprints, Preprint Archives, Pre-publication Servers | Open Data, Research Data Sharing, Research Reproducibility |
| Relacionados | 4 | 4 |
| Resumen≠ | Preprint servers are open-access repositories where researchers post manuscripts before, during, or alongside peer review at a formal journal. Preprints allow rapid, free dissemination of research findings without waiting for journal review (which can take 3–12 months). Major preprint servers include arXiv (physics, math, computer science; founded 1991), bioRxiv (biology; 2013), medRxiv (medicine; 2019), and others. Preprints are NOT peer-reviewed and should not be treated as final scientific evidence. However, they enable priority-claiming, feedback from the community, and rapid knowledge sharing in fast-moving fields. Many journals now accept manuscripts previously posted as preprints. | Data sharing and open science are practices that maximize research transparency and reproducibility by making raw data, analysis code, and methods publicly available alongside publications. The replication crisis (widespread failure to reproduce published findings in psychology, medicine, and other fields) revealed that traditional publication—focusing on novel results—incentivizes selective reporting and p-hacking. Open science practices (preregistration, data sharing, code sharing, open materials) aim to reduce bias and enable independent verification. Major funders (NIH, NSF, EU) now mandate open science practices, and many journals require data availability statements or code repositories. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|