Flag by part of paper 
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- etc.

Autoflag
-after flagging a reference, any node created using that reference will receive a flag notification

Other ideas for reasons to "Flag" a node

- Too redundant (too many repetitions)
- Information is contradictory
- Inappropriate results
- Inappropriate interpretations
- Influence by author's personal ambitions
- Other (include reasoning)


University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

New feature that allows researchers to flag reference (and possibly other types) of nodes for different reasons.

"Flagged" Nodes for COVID-19 Research

Flaws in the published journal papers

There are many repetitions and contradictions in the disseminated information.

Repetition and contradiction in collaborative research

Career trajectories are tied to publishing in prominent journals.

Personal ambitions and carrier incentives

Reasons to "Flag" a node

- "Flagged" history 
- "Flagged" reasoning
- "Flagged" references (and other nodes?) tab similar to pending proposals

Associated feature ideas for "Flagged" nodes

Flaws in published journal papers

This is the root node for evidences/artifacts associated with the topic. The COVID-19 research inefficiencies can be rooted from multiple factors, and the redundancies are one of them.  However, it is important to note that a larger issue of the cause of such redundancies may be to do with an efficient dissemination mechanism.


COVID-19 research Inefficiencies stemmed from redundancies 

This is the root node for evidences/artifacts associated with the topic. The COVID-19 research inefficiencies can be rooted from multiple factors, and the contradictions are one of them.  Although research reproducibility and contradictions are part of process in scientific research in general, during COVID-19 pandemic, it is more consequential when studies contradict.  

COVID-19 research inefficiencies stemmed from contradictions 

Example of redundant/ repetitive works

A tweet makes the claim that the hydroxychloroquine study was published to say that the drug does not work as a treatment for COVID-19 so that pharmaceutical companies could make money off of other more expensive drugs as treatment. The tweet links an article for more details. 

Example of the use of Twitter to make claims about why the Hydroxychloroquine study had ulterior motives behind sharing its false findings

A tweet makes the claim that the biopharmaceutical company Gilead is responsible for influencing studies to publish papers to say that HCQ is ineffective so that they can continue to develop and sell Remdesivir, an FDA approved treatment for COVID-19. 

Learn Before

Related

Learn After