![[object Object]](https://images.prismic.io/researchsquare/2ce0068e-adcd-4dae-a703-ca5fc5946d8d_Untitled+design+%285%29.png?auto=compress,format&rect=0,0,600,400&w=600&h=400)
In 2020, preprints became the scientific community’s most significant vehicle for research communication during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the pandemic generated a tidal wave of research, preprints gave the world’s scientists an opportunity to make their research quickly, broadly, and openly available.
Collectively, the COVID-19 preprints on Research Square made a massive impact. By the end of this year, the research communicated through preprints enabled scientists throughout the world to achieve the Herculean task of developing and approving a vaccine—and to save countless lives in the meantime by spreading the most effective, evidence-based public health practices.
Here we look back at some of Research Square’s most widely viewed, discussed, and impactful preprints of 2020. Each of these preprints, in their own way, had significant effects on the research community, their scientific disciplines, and society at large.
#1: “The role of Vitamin D in the prevention of Coronavirus Disease 2019 infection and mortality”
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-21211/v1
This study evaluated whether vitamin D levels in the blood are associated with the number of COVID-19 cases and its mortality. The researchers compared the mean levels of vitamin D in European countries alongside the number of cases of COVID-19 and COVID-19-related deaths per 1 million individuals. The results showed that countries with populations having low average vitamin D levels are associated with relatively higher numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths registered within those countries. While the study has its limitations (i.e., as a cross-sectional analysis, the researchers did not evaluate vitamin D levels specifically in infected individuals; and there were a limited number of COVID-19 tests early in the pandemic), the data suggest that higher vitamin D levels may have a protective effect against COVID-19.
HTML page views: 396,456
PDF downloads: 4,858
Total citations: 30
Altmetric score: 1,831
Total community comments: 68
Link to published article: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40520-020-01570-8
#2 “SARS-CoV-2 T-cell epitopes define heterologous and COVID-19-induced T-cell recognition”
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-35331/v1
For COVID-19 vaccines to work, scientists need to know which areas of the virus, or epitopes, can activate immune cells, also known as T cells. The authors of this study used computer algorithms to predict which epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 could activate these T cells. To confirm their predictions, they measured how T cells responded using blood samples from 180 individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and 185 individuals not exposed to the virus. The team discovered that 81% of unexposed individuals had at least some T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 epitopes, as some of these epitopes are similar to those on common-cold-causing coronaviruses. This study helps show that there is at least some built-in immune protection from SARS-CoV-2 in humans. It also helps show that T-cell responses in previously infected people are much more robust than those in unexposed individuals. The study suggests that promoting T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 may be important for designing effective therapeutic and preventive measures.
HTML page views: 167,741
PDF downloads: 5,473
Total citations: 20
Altmetric score: 3,738
Total community comments: 11
Link to published article: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x
#3 “Positive Epstein-Barr virus detection in corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients”
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-21580/v1
The objective of this retrospective single-center study was to detect Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) coinfections in COVID-19 patients around the start of the pandemic. Researchers tested the blood serum of 67 COVID-19 patients for EBV at a hospital in Wuhan University. Patients were then divided into one of two groups: those with EBV seropositive results and those with EBV seronegative results. The differences in characteristics between the two groups were then compared. The results: More than half of the patients were found to be seropositive. After comparing these patients’ medical records, they calculated that EBV seropositive COVID-19 patients had a three-fold risk of having a fever as a symptom compared to EBV seronegative patients. They also found that EBV seropositivity was also associated with increased inflammation of body tissue - and that EBV reactivation in the body may affect the treatment of COVID-19.
HTML page views: 107,835
PDF downloads: 477
Total citations: 4
Altmetric score: 204
Total community comments: 73
Link to published article: (Not currently published)
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-94837/v1
This study describes the characteristics of a particular vaccine candidate: ChAdOx1, which is created by inserting SARS-CoV-2 genes into the DNA of an adenovirus, a common type of virus that does not typically cause illness in humans. The researchers tested whether vaccine candidate ChAdOx1, which is derived from such a common and benign virus for humans, would produce enough of a critical viral protein (SARS-CoV-2 S) to generate an effective immune response. They also looked at the quantity of adenovirus genes expressed, as too many could prevent an anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune response. Using two different cell lines to test the vaccine, they found that ChAdOx1 led to high quantities of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein and minimal expression of adenoviral genes, suggesting that the vaccine has the potential to promote an immune response against SARS-CoV-2.
HTML page views:89,321
PDF downloads: 2,267
Total citations: 1
Altmetric score: 1151
Total community comments: 0
Link to published article: (Not currently published)
#5 “Efficacy and Safety of Ivermectin for Treatment and prophylaxis of COVID-19 Pandemic”
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-100956/v3
This study looks at the efficacy of Ivermectin, an FDA-approved antiparasitic drug, for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 infections in humans. The study involved 600 subjects, 400 of whom were COVID-19 patients, and the rest being healthcare and household contacts of COVID-19 patients. They were all divided into six groups of 100. Those in groups one and two had mild to moderate COVID-19 infections and were given standard care, plus doses of either Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine. Those in groups three and four had severe COVID-19 infections and were given doses of either Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine. Those in groups five and six had no COVID-19 infections and were given either personal protection measures (PPMs) only - or PPMs, plus a dose of Ivermectin. This study found that Ivermectin could be a very effective treatment for COVID-19 compared to Hydroxychloroquine. Especially if Ivermectin is taken shortly after contracting the virus, it could reduce mortality rates, number of days before a positive RT-PCR turns negative, and recovery time in COVID-19 patients. The study also helped show that Ivermectin plus the use of PPMs could reduce the incidence of COVID-19 infection in healthcare and household contacts by up to 10% compared to just using PPMs.
HTML page views:102,936
PDF downloads: 5,222
Total citations: 0
Altmetric score: 87
Total community comments: 13
Link to published article: (Not currently published)
To learn more about preprinting, visit https://www.researchsquare.com/researchers/preprints.