Topic summary

Revisiting: How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work

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

This is a generated summary. It shows the 5 most-liked posts from a topic of 36, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

ni.kravchenkoTL2 Solution15 Jun 2026 · edited#2

Unrefereed work is not worthless and a great deal of it survives review substantially unchanged. That is the accurate framing and it is not a licence to treat it as final.

Adding this to the thread rather than to the wiki, because I am not confident enough for the wiki.

31 likes 1mo

n.ramosTL222 Jun 2026#6

Post #5 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.

The honest position on most preprints in this field is that they are interesting and provisional, and that saying both is not fence-sitting.

23 likes 1mo

two_year_lineTL3Regular26 Jun 2026#9

A request rather than an answer: could whoever has the primary source for community labels post it? I have seen the claim three times this month and each version had lost a qualifier.

32 likes 1mo

methods_marginTL3Regular8 Jul 2026#18

j.sandvik, post #15: I would put moderate confidence on the mainstream reading of community labels and no more. That is not scepticism for its own sake; it is where the sourcing actually stops. Go to post

Where I part company with post #16, and it is a narrow parting.

Author track record is a weak signal and it is a signal. A group that has published carefully for years is a different prior from an unknown one.

Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.

26 likes in reply to #15 20d

JFitzgibbonTL2Member17 Jul 2026#27

I had written a reply contradicting post #26 and deleted it. Here is what survived.

Two sentences on community labels and then I will stop, because the rest is speculation and the thread is better without mine.

What is documented is narrow. What is inferred from it is broad. The gap between them is where every argument here lives.

29 likes in reply to #15 10d

Read the full topic (36 posts)

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
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
Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part Evidence › Preprints needs a source risk of bias preprint effect size Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. A question about how this site should cite something…	+38	42	863	22mo
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
Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size needs a source preprint Pinned On the subject in the title: Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning Working notes rather than a conclusion. A preprint question rather than a question about the finding in it.…		2	467	4mo
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, risk of bias, preprint

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Follow-up: Retatrutide phase 2 in type 2 diabetes: the Lancet paper Compounds › Retatrutide retatrutide effect size TRIUMPH programme preprint Retatrutide phase 2 in type 2 diabetes: the Lancet paper Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. A follow-up question about Retatrutide phase 2 in type that I did…	+1	5	31k	8mo
Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal Evidence › Journal club estimand effect size risk of bias journal club Under review On the subject in the title: Journal club: SUSTAIN 6 and its retinopathy signal Working notes rather than a conclusion. Reading SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016) for the population rather than the effect,…	+110	122	46k	1d
A 40-week log with the measurement method stated — does this still hold? Outcomes › Progress reports effect size DXA data table Solved A 40-week log with the measurement method stated — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Posting a small dataset on 40-week log. It is…	+1	5	14k	2mo
What the GIP component of tirzepatide is thought to contribute, and how confident we can be Compounds › Tirzepatide tirzepatide SURPASS programme SURMOUNT programme effect size Solved What the GIP component of tirzepatide is thought to contribute, and how confident we can be I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I would like to know what…	+16	20	23k	19h
Tracking semaglutide's approved indications across jurisdictions, dated — does this still hold? Compounds › Semaglutide randomised trial type 2 diabetes STEP programme effect size Solved Tracking semaglutide's approved indications across jurisdictions, dated — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Practical question…	+58	62	49k	20mo