Evidence · Preprints

[2026 update] Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation

Evidence › Preprints needs a source effect size preprint risk of bias

Closed

j.vogelTL27 Dec 2025#1

Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable.

Reading an unrefereed manuscript properly, and asking whether I am doing it in the right order.

What I do at the moment: check the version and the posting date, read the methods, check whether the analysis matches whatever plan is described, then read the conclusion last. The abstract I read only afterwards, on the theory that reading it first anchors everything.

Is there a step in that sequence which is doing no work, and a step I have left out?

21 likes 8mo

v.nascimentoTL213 Dec 2025#2

Always label it as a preprint in any discussion. A preprint is not a published trial and it is not settled knowledge. Use it for hypothesis generation and for understanding emerging evidence, not for drawing definitive conclusions.

That holds under the stated conditions and I have stated them.

3 likes 7mo

j.baptistaTL218 Dec 2025#3

If you cite a preprint in a maintained document here, the convention is to label it in the sentence and to note the check date. The document review will catch the update.

Same conclusion as the reply above, reached differently, which is mildly reassuring.

0 likes 7mo

This topic was referenced in

How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long versionEvidence › Preprints · 23 replies

This topic was closed 180 days after the last reply. Closing is automatic for quiet topics so that a settled answer does not collect new questions underneath it. If you have a follow-up, open a new topic and link back to this one — that keeps both readable and gives your question its own title.

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication Evidence › Preprints preprint needs a source effect size Wiki Closed A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A preprint question rather than a question about the finding in it. The…	+90	95	21k	9mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint needs a source How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Reading an unrefereed manuscript properly, and asking whether I…	+112	119	1.3k	2y
The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it — a second dataset Evidence › Preprints needs a source risk of bias preprint effect size The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it — a second dataset Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. A question about how this site should cite…	+50	54	1.4k	11mo
When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — a second dataset Evidence › Preprints preprint risk of bias needs a source Solved When a preprint is the best available evidence and we say so — a second dataset I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. A preprint question rather than a…	+20	24	36k	14mo
A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — what changed since Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size needs a source On the subject in the title: A preprint whose numbers changed substantially at publication — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion. A preprint question rather than a question about the…	+3	7	125	8mo

Related topics — sharing the tags needs a source, effect size, preprint

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — one year on Compounds › Tirzepatide SURMOUNT programme randomised trial tirzepatide SURPASS programme Solved Closed Posting this under the heading it deserves: SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — one year on Everything below is what sits behind that. I would like to disagree carefully…	+122	136	48k	9mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version Evidence › Preprints needs a source effect size risk of bias Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — the long version Reading an unrefereed manuscript properly, and asking whether I am doing…	+18	23	21k	2mo
Why cagrilintide alone is discussed so much less than in combination Compounds › Cagrilintide & amylin analogues effect size amylin analogues cagrisema Solved Closed Why cagrilintide alone is discussed so much less than in combination I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Collecting what is known about cagrilintide alone…	+93	108	35k	16mo
When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not Evidence › Meta-analyses effect size heterogeneity publication bias Solved When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Network meta-analysis, from the point of view of someone…		2	27k	4h
Second pass at: Retatrutide mass and identity: what a report should show Compounds › Retatrutide retatrutide randomised trial effect size Solved Second pass at: Retatrutide mass and identity: what a report should show — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Two things I would like separated before anyone answers on…	+65	71	4.6k	13mo

Sponsored Sigma-Aldrich — certified reference materialsReference standards, analytical reagents and certified materials for method calibration. If you are validating a method, this is where the standard comes from.Reference standards →