Efforts to share research with the public must include mechanisms to prevent harm resulting from low-quality work.

I started my career as an infectious-disease epidemiologist at the Singapore Ministry of Health. Soon I was fighting the first coronavirus epidemic, that of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). That was in 2003, a world before biomedical preprints. In the middle of the current pandemic, I am thinking about preprints and research integrity. My professional expertise has come full circle.

I co-designed the Netherlands’ National Survey on Research Integrity (NSRI), one of the world’s largest on the topic. In July, we reported in a preprint that about 8% of researchers admitted committing misconduct, a higher figure than was found by previous studies. About one in two researchers admitted to frequently engaging in questionable research practices, including underplaying a study’s flaws and limitations. These findings have implications for the avalanche of preprints being deposited in public repositories.

The case for releasing preprints is clear: results from scientific studies are made more quickly and more broadly available. Overall, greater sharing and transparency boosts trustworthiness and collaboration. But efforts to promote preprints without simultaneously implementing firm measures to ensure that the research is of high quality put the cart before the horse.