hydroxychloroquine

In response to two November 2021 articles in The Scientist that called out preprints as a source of medical misinformation, the cofounders of bioRxiv and medRxiv say it’s not the publishing model that’s at fault.

Preprints can be valuable additions to the scientific literature. But we must start seeing them as perishable commodities rather than akin to peer-reviewed, published studies.

In his book’s Introduction, physician-scientist Paul A. Offit reviews the unusual constellation of circumstances around the development of COVID-19 vaccines.

A complaint lodged by researchers in France prompts two petitions supporting Bik’s whistleblowing work.

The Retraction Watch team takes a look at the most important publishing mistakes this year.

The changes, which affect the declarations authors have to sign and the peer-review process, have received a mixed response from the scientific community.

Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, once thought to be promising COVID-19 treatments, come with serious heart risks.

Scientists have raised questions about the dataset published in The Lancet last week that triggered the suspension of clinical trials around the world—and about Surgisphere Corporation, the company behind the study.

A paper published in The Lancet reported that hospitalized COVID-19 patients taking the drug had a higher risk of death, although some researchers have raised questions about the data.

The report by Didier Raoult and colleagues that examined the use of the anti-malarial drug in a small number of COVID-19 patients receives criticism from the very society that published it.

President Donald Trump has touted the drug as a treatment but scientists still don’t know for sure that it is effective in patients. A number of clinical trials aim to find out.