Preprint Disclosure Standards
Research
Research
Research
Research
Preprint disclosure is not a legal formality. It is a substantive commitment to the people who read research and need to know whether it has been externally evaluated. This page explains exactly how Expertini Research discloses preprint status — and why it matters.
The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated with unusual clarity what happens when preprint status is not disclosed — or is disclosed in footnotes that nobody reads. Papers making claims about treatments, transmission rates, and vaccine efficacy were reported as settled science by journalists who did not distinguish between a preprint uploaded on a Tuesday and a paper that had spent eight months in peer review.
The problem was not that preprints existed. The problem was that readers — including many journalists and policymakers — did not understand what they were reading. Preprint disclosure is the mechanism that addresses this. It does not make preprints less valuable; it makes them honest.
Expertini Research treats disclosure as a design principle, not a legal box to tick. Every surface where a paper appears — browse results, search results, paper pages, citation exports, email digests — carries the review status of that paper.
Every paper's review status is visible in at least five places:
We use 14 output type labels. Here is what each means and how the review status is determined:
| Label | Peer review status | Who confirms |
|---|---|---|
| Preprint | Not peer reviewed | Default — no confirmation needed |
| Peer-Reviewed Article | Externally reviewed by recognised journal | Author confirms; we spot-check credible claims |
| Bachelor's Thesis | Examined by academic committee | Author confirms |
| Master's Thesis | Examined by academic committee | Author confirms |
| Doctoral Thesis | Examined by academic committee | Author confirms |
| Conference Paper | May have been reviewed by programme committee | Author confirms; status varies by conference |
| Book Chapter | Varies by researcher | Author confirms |
| Technical Report | Not typically peer reviewed | Default |
| Working Paper | Not peer reviewed | Default |
| Case Study | Not peer reviewed | Default |
| White Paper | Not peer reviewed | Default |
| Data Paper | Not peer reviewed | Default |
| Review Article | Not peer reviewed | Default |
| Registered Report | Protocol may be peer reviewed | Author confirms |
Reading a preprint responsibly requires the same critical evaluation skills as reading any scientific paper — plus explicit awareness that the methodology, data analysis, and conclusions have not been assessed by independent expert reviewers. Specifically:
When a paper requires correction or retraction, the disclosure remains visible and permanent. We do not delete retracted papers — we add a retraction notice explaining the reason. This follows the established practice of major journals and preprint servers and serves an important function: citations to a retracted paper need to resolve to something, and that something should clearly communicate that the paper was retracted and why.
Authors who dispute a retraction decision may appeal by contacting research@expertini.com. Appeals are reviewed by the editorial team and responded to within 10 working days.
Every paper clearly labelled. Every reader correctly informed. No exceptions.