Learn Before
COVID-19 researches need to be able to easily find relevant and important papers among the mass influx of COVID papers in order to acquire more knowledge and advance their research.
COVID-19 researchers need to be able to access COVID articles and their cited articles in order to conduct a more comprehensive review of the literature.
Wikipedia: Restrictions against preprints and what adds credibility to a source
Recent papers have shown the validity of using Vitamin C and D in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. It was requested that this should be mentioned in the page, but it was quickly shut down due to the restrictions against preprints. Some people think this should still be worth mentioning since there’s extensive research on it and the fact that it it is done by notable and achieved scientists should be enough to be at least addressed. "Many reputable doctors and medical facilities, such as the Eastern Virginia Medical School are treating COVID-19 patients with Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Zinc, Thiamin and Melatonin. That is worth mentioning somewhere in the article. There is no need to reach a conclusion on the efficacy of these treatments.Tvaughan1 (talk) 01:36, 20 July 2020 (UTC)"
0
1
Contributors are:
Who are from:
Tags
CSCW (Computer-supported cooperative work)
Computing Sciences
Related
Different sources of knowledge
The user Jura on Wikipedia talks states that interdisciplinary exchange would benefit specialists
Tweet and reply from Jonathon Block and Glen de Vries about importance of scicomm and pre-print dangers
Steven Nono tweets about the importance of science communication with so many papers being published
Bhramar Mukherjee tweets that the exponential curve of COVID papers needs to flatten
Wikipedia: Different research demonstrates different results regarding the effectiveness of a drug/treatment that causes a big gap among the data being communicated.
Wikipedia: WHO vs Johns Hopkins University (JHU): two trusted sources constantly differ in data.
Wikipedia: Research projects being buried under more research and information is being overlooked or hard to be reached at.
Wikipedia: Inconsistencies in numbers vary from source to source. Does accuracy in data make it credible, or should the source's identity be the deciding factor in reliability?
Wikipedia: Restrictions against preprints and what adds credibility to a source
Big surge of information regarding COVID-19, people should find multiple sources to find reliability in the information, and not accept all information at face value.
Preprints: some researchers believe speed is more important of validity. These are different times when information is needed more urgently, still, it is recommended researchers investigate further on these preprints and peer review them themselves.
Kareem Carr tweets about scientists communication mistakes
Egon Willighagen tweets that Springer Nature claims to allow researchers have free access to all of its COVID papers but does not allow researchers to read the cited papers of these articles
Austin Wright expresses that researchers should expand their sources from where they are getting information
Wikipedia: Restrictions against preprints and what adds credibility to a source
Wikipedia: Are hashtags a valid way for pinpointing important information?