<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/">
<channel rdf:about="https://biorxiv.org">
<admin:errorReportsTo rdf:resource="mailto:biorxiv@cshlpress.edu"/>
<title>bioRxiv Subject Collection: Scientific Communication And Education</title>
<link>https://biorxiv.org</link>
<description>
This feed contains articles for bioRxiv Subject Collection "Scientific Communication And Education"
</description>

<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.04.741794v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.01.742186v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.28.741134v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.29.741583v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.29.741400v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.03.736421v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.738993v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.739248v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.15.738584v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.739022v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.15.738744v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.14.736897v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.13.737239v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736808v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736686v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.05.736636v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.29.732987v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.29.735371v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.26.734852v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.30.735556v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.21.733226v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.15.731690v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.10.731420v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.09.730786v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.07.730654v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.02.729548v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.22.727235v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.29.728775v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.28.728385v1?rss=1"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.24.727542v1?rss=1"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
<prism:eIssn/>
<prism:publicationName>bioRxiv</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn/>

<image rdf:resource=""/>
</channel>
<image rdf:about="">
<title>bioRxiv</title>
<url>https://www.biorxiv.org/sites/default/files/bioRxiv_article.jpg</url>
<link>https://www.biorxiv.org</link>
</image>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.04.741794v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Variation in CURE instruction and limitations of CURE studies undermine what can be concluded about CURE effects on student outcomes 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.04.741794v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Research suggests that students realize a range of cognitive, affective, and motivation-related outcomes by participating in course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). However, the overall effects of CUREs on student outcomes are unclear. We sought to address this knowledge gap by embarking on a meta-analysis of CURE studies using the Population, Intervention, Comparison/Control group, and Outcomes framework. We conducted a literature search to produce an analytic sample of 353 studies of the effects of CUREs instruction on undergraduates. We characterized the CUREs being studied in this sample, including their dose, duration, and design. We also examined each study to determine if outcomes were measured before and after the CURE and with a comparison or control group so that effects could be attributed to CURE. We found substantial limitations in studies of CUREs, which precluded meta-analysis. CUREs varied widely and were unevenly described, making it difficult to determine what could or should constitute CURE instruction as an intervention. Many outcomes were studied, often without a comparison or control group and with inconsistent measurement and reporting. Our results indicate that advancements are needed in the design and reporting of research on CUREs to gauge their effects on student outcomes.

Highlight SummaryMany studies of CURE instruction aim to show effects on student outcomes. Yet, systematic review of these studies reveals limitations in study design, methods, and reporting that preclude meta-analysis and limit any cross-study conclusions.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Lantz, W. N., Dolan, E. L., Barvalia, S., Apraku, S., Kandru, H., Senthamizh Selvan, M., Majewska, A. A. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-08-05</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.08.04.741794</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Variation in CURE instruction and limitations of CURE studies undermine what can be concluded about CURE effects on student outcomes]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-08-05</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.01.742186v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAP) of Cat Owners Towards Flea Infestation and Flea-Borne Diseases (FBDs) in Selected Regions of Bangladesh 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.01.742186v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Background: Flea infestation is an important companion-animal health problem and a prime source of zoonotic exposure. However, information on cat owners awareness and preventive behavior regarding fleas and flea-borne diseases (FBDs) in Bangladesh is limited. This study assessed the knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) of cat owners regarding flea infestation and flea-borne diseases in selected areas of central Bangladesh. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from November 2025 to July 2026 among 238 cat owners attending veterinary clinics in Savar, Dhamrai and Manikganj Upazila. Data were collected using a pretested structured questionnaire covering respondent characteristics, flea biology and transmission, perceived risks, and flea-prevention and control practices. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the findings, and respondents were classified according to their overall KAP scores. Results: Of the respondents, 47.1% owned cats with outdoor access and 77.7% reported that their pets had previously experienced flea infestation. Although 65.5% used flea-control treatments, awareness of zoonotic and disease-transmission risks was limited. Only 14.7% recognized that fleas can parasitize humans, while 17.6% knew that fleas can transmit infectious agents. Overall, 83.2% of respondents had poor knowledge, whereas 69.7% demonstrated moderate attitudes and 63.9% showed moderate practices. Good knowledge and good practice were uncommon, accounting for only 3.8% and 4.6% of respondents, respectively. Veterinary recommendation was the most frequently reported motivation for using flea-control products. Conclusions: Cat owners attending in the surveyed areas frequently reported flea exposure and treatment use, but substantial gaps remained in their understanding of flea biology, zoonotic potential and comprehensive control. Targeted veterinary education emphasizing routine prevention, treatment of all susceptible household animals and environmental management is needed. These findings provide regional baseline evidence and should not be interpreted as nationally representative. Keywords: Bangladesh; cat owners; ectoparasites; flea-borne diseases; flea control; knowledge, attitudes and practices; One Health.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Rabbi, M. R. R., Miti, A. A., Safowan, M., Mukti, Z. F., Hossain, M. S., Riad, M., Azad, M. A. K., Tonmoy, M. J. R., Pramanik, N., Al-Noman, K. M. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-08-04</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.08.01.742186</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAP) of Cat Owners Towards Flea Infestation and Flea-Borne Diseases (FBDs) in Selected Regions of Bangladesh]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-08-04</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.28.741134v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Evolutionary Dynamics of AI, Politicization, Contestation, and Trust in Science Funding 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.28.741134v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Economic stability and progress in modern technological societies depend on vigorous and independent public funding of science and engineering research. When peer review or funding decisions are perceived as politically directed, scientists, funding agencies, and the public react in coupled and conflicting ways. We describe an evolutionary game-theoretic model to analyze how perceived political interference in science funding affects the interrelated behaviors of scientists, funding agencies, and the public. The model simulates scientists choosing to refuse peer reviews and retaliate, agencies responding by adopting AI-assisted review and altering reviewer pay, and the public accepting or rejecting these AI systems. Through numerical simulations, five principal findings are identified: (1) Operational capacity and institutional legitimacy are governed by separate conditions and can fail independently. (2) Legitimacy of the process is bistable, meaning final states are determined by the publics acceptance of AI. (3) Since the career cost for researchers refusing to review is generally low, resistance/retaliation cascades can readily ignite, leading identical institutions to entirely opposite fates. (4) Increasing reviewer pay only stabilizes participation within a strict budget-solvency frontier, and emergency pay can paradoxically erode the legitimacy it aims to protect. (5) Finally, finite-population simulations reveal that baseline scenarios partition into either legitimacy recovery without capacity or joint failure, confirming that the fundamental separation of capacity and legitimacy outcomes is a dominant structural feature driven primarily by initial scientific resistance and politicization levels. This theoretical work quantifies issues for future work in science policy.

SignificanceModern industrial nations rely on public funding of science, certified through expert peer reviews whose authority rest as much on perceived institutional independence as on processing capacity. We model what happens when review or funding decisions are seen as politically directed, and artificial intelligence (AI) substitutes for resistant human reviewers. Treating scientists, the public, and an adaptive funding agency as interacting populations, the model shows that operational capacity and institutional legitimacy obey separate dynamics and can fail independently: automation can sustain a review pipeline while its authority collapses, or legitimacy can recover while backlogs persist. Under finite populations, identical institutions can reach markedly different fates by chance alone, and how often chance favors survival depends on the noise process assumed, not on a fixed institutional probability. This framework identifies which conditions govern whether resistance ignites or whether legitimacy, once threatened, is repaired, as explicit future priorities for empirical calibration and policy design.

Lay AbstractModern societies depend on public funding for scientific research, a system that only functions if the public believes the process is fair. Using evolutionary game theory, this mathematical work explores what happens when scientific peer review is viewed as politically compromised, and funding agencies turn to artificial intelligence (AI) to replace human experts who protest the system.

The mathematical model reveals several critical warnings for policymakers:

O_LIAutomation Does Not Equal Trust: Keeping grant money flowing and maintaining public trust are two separate problems. An agency can successfully use AI to process grants while the public completely loses faith in its decisions, creating a "zombie" institution.
C_LIO_LIThe Threat of "Proposal Flooding": When scientists protest, in principle they refuse to undertake peer review, and can overwhelm the funding agency by submitting many proposals. This retaliatory flooding and refusal to review, within a limited budget, can outpace any AI systems ability to keep up, causing the entire pipeline to collapse.
C_LIO_LIEmergency Pay Can Backfire: Trying to secure scientists cooperation by raising reviewer pay during a highly politicized crisis can make things worse, as the public may view this emergency pay as a "bribe," which rapidly destroys whatever institutional trust remains.
C_LIO_LIEarly Action is Critical: Human behavior is unpredictable, small early differences in how people react can push identical institutions toward completely different fates. This model tracks individual scientists and members of the public to capture their behavior, which appears to be model-dependent, thus producing sensitivity to early demographic fluctuations and chance factors. Under the standard assumption, every simulated agency ended up with an unmanageable backlog; the only thing chance decided was whether public trust recovered. Under a coarser and more commonly used shortcut, roughly half the agencies appeared to recover fully, and a "zombie" agency that kept processing grants while trust collapsed appeared in about one in six. Policymakers therefore must urgently focus on building trust through transparent, explainable AI rollouts before public rejection becomes permanent.
C_LI
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Ray, A. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-31</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.28.741134</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Evolutionary Dynamics of AI, Politicization, Contestation, and Trust in Science Funding]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-31</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.29.741583v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Teaching adipose tissue as an organ system: addressing weight bias and enhancing anatomical understanding through AdipoAtlas 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.29.741583v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Adipose tissue (body fat) is increasingly recognized as a dynamic organ system essential to human health, with distinct depots that serve specialized biological functions. However, this understanding is not reflected in traditional human anatomy curricula, where adipose tissue is typically introduced only as connective tissue and treated in dissection as an obstacle to be removed rather than a structure worthy of study. Anatomy dissection courses have been identified as a source of negative weight bias in medical students, with students reporting disgust toward adipose tissue and frustration with its removal to visualize course-required anatomical structures. Here, we hypothesize that reframing adipose tissue as a functional organ system within anatomy curricula may improve students understanding of human anatomy and mitigate these negative perceptions. To test this, we created a human adipose atlas (AdipoAtlas) by identifying and photographing macroscopic adipose depots in an anatomical donor and organizing these images into an anatomical reference with evidence-based functional descriptions. The atlas was integrated into a human anatomy dissection course, followed by a survey assessing students perceptions of adipose tissue and attitudes related to weight bias, with a concurrent non-dissection anatomy course serving as a control. Students in the adipose-inclusive course reported more positive perceptions and improved understanding of adipose tissue as a multifunctional organ system, while responses related to weight-based discrimination and broader attitudes toward body size were similar between groups. These results support our hypothesis that integrating adipose tissue into anatomy education improves anatomical understanding and may reduce negative weight-related perceptions.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hermsmeyer, I. D. K., Sonneville, K. R., Patterson, A. M. S., Sherwood, R. M., Orlikoff, E. R., MacDougald, O. A., Orczykowski, M. E. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-30</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.29.741583</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Teaching adipose tissue as an organ system: addressing weight bias and enhancing anatomical understanding through AdipoAtlas]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-30</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.29.741400v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Grant writing coaching groups: A randomized trial to discern the influences of coaching duration and engagement of scientific mentors on participants proposal submission and success rates 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.29.741400v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
IntroductionThe acquisition of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants is an increasingly competitive undertaking. Many early-career biomedical investigators lack sufficient grant writing skills. This pragmatic, 2x2 factorial, group-randomized trial tested the effects of coaching duration and mode of engagement of participants scientific mentors in a grant writing coaching group intervention on grant application outcomes.

MethodsA national US sample of 367 faculty and postdoctoral fellows, organized into 76 coaching groups across 6 cohorts (2020-2022), was randomized to 1 of 4 arms that differed by coaching duration (5 months vs 5 months plus 18 months of access to 1:1 coaching) and mode of scientific mentor engagement (structured vs unstructured). Primary outcomes were national-level grant application submissions and awards, and success rate among submitters, assessed via surveys and verified through award databases 30 months after study initiation.

ResultsAmong 271 faculty and 96 postdoctoral fellows, 69% submitted at least 1 national application and 32% were awarded at least 1 grant. Submission rates did not differ by experimental arm. Among faculty, the structured engagement of a mentor in coaching was associated with significantly higher odds of any award (adjusted OR = 1.87) and any NIH mentored career development (K) award (adjusted OR = 3.32), and with higher success rates for these proposal types. Extended coaching duration showed a positive but not statistically significant association with faculty awards after adjustment. Neither factor significantly affected outcomes for postdoctoral fellows. Faculty success rates exceeded national NIH-reported success rates for research project grants equivalent to the R01 mechanism (43% vs 17.6%) and K awards (51% vs 36.5%).

ConclusionParticipation in a national, cross-institutional, group coaching model yielded high grant submission outcomes, and award rates were higher relative to NIH benchmarks. Structured integration of scientific mentors with the coaching intervention had a greater effect than extended coaching duration on faculty outcomes.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Okuyemi, K., Weber Main, A. M., Steiner, M., Engler, J., Jones, H., Zhou, W., Monahan, P., Langi, A., McGee, R. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-30</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.29.741400</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Grant writing coaching groups: A randomized trial to discern the influences of coaching duration and engagement of scientific mentors on participants proposal submission and success rates]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-30</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.03.736421v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Landscape-mediated spread dynamics and anticipatory surveillance of African swine fever in wild boar: insights from the 2025-2026 Catalonia utbreak in Spain 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.03.736421v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
African swine fever (ASF) in wild boar poses major surveillance and control challenges, particularly in periurban and human-modified landscapes where ecological complexity, delayed detection, and heterogeneous host movements complicate out-break interpretation. In late 2025, ASF was detected in wild boar in Catalonia, Spain, creating a high-priority epidemiological scenario at the wildlife-urban interface. In this study, we analysed the 2025-2026 Catalonia outbreak using scenario-based spatial modelling with the WIMBOARD (Wild Integrated Movement Boar Outbreak and Risk Dynamics) framework. Simulations under baseline control conditions were used to interpret spread dynamics and support anticipatory surveillance. The results indicate that outbreak expansion was structured and directional rather than isotropic. Temporal outputs suggested delayed detectability between infection prevalence and mortality signals, whereas cumulative spatial risk maps, time-to-infection surfaces, and monthly infection-risk dynamics identified directional asymmetries and differentiated phases of spread. An early southward dispersal signal was consistent with initial field observations, while the north-northwest sector emerged as the most consequential expansion scenario because of its stronger functional connectivity and higher potential for regional amplification and persistence, while a later northeast-ward phase remained comparatively less influential within the 500-day simulation horizon. Monthly risk surfaces further showed that ASF spread behaved as a moving eco-epidemiological wavefront, allowing identification of shifting surveillance windows before mortality became apparent. These findings support the interpretation of the Catalonia outbreak as a landscape-mediated epidemiological process shaped by functional connectivity, wildlife behavioural adaptation, peri-urban ecological structure, and delayed detection. This study shows how spatially explicit eco-epidemiological modelling can support outbreak interpretation, surveillance prioritisation, and proactive wildlife disease management under complex field conditions.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Bosch, J., Ivorra, B., Aguilar-Vega, C., Ito, S., Sanchez Vizcaino, J. M., Ramos, A. M. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-27</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.03.736421</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Landscape-mediated spread dynamics and anticipatory surveillance of African swine fever in wild boar: insights from the 2025-2026 Catalonia utbreak in Spain]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-27</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.738993v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Caffeinated Coli: Inspiring the Next Generation of Scientists through Synthetic Biology 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.738993v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
The Caffeinated Coli Educational Module brings inquiry-driven learning to high schools, introducing students to scientific research, synthetic biology, and genetic engineering. The module focuses on the exploration of a genetically engineered strain of E. coli modified to grow exclusively on caffeine and, as such, can be used as a measurement device to determine the amount of caffeine in a liquid or beverage. Students conduct two bioassay experiments using these bacteria. During this process, they learn to create cultures and then measure bacterial growth followed by calculating the caffeine concentrations of unknown samples using their own data. This flexible module contains five weeks of original lectures and student learning materials that follow Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), allowing the content to be adapted for basic, intermediate, or advanced biology courses. Upon completion of the module, students and teachers expressed that the most memorable aspects of the module include collaboration with peers, hands-on learning of content, and the opportunity to interact with the professor/mentors through office hours. Already implemented in 8 Texas high schools over the past two academic years, our module inspires STEM learning while bringing 21st century biology research to new audiences.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Tian, N. Y., Reddy, R., Zhang, C. Y., Williams, B., Mishler, D. M. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-21</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.17.738993</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Caffeinated Coli: Inspiring the Next Generation of Scientists through Synthetic Biology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-21</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.739248v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Career incentives make Registered Reports unattractive under realistic academic conditions 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.739248v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Registered Reports are a publication format designed to reduce publication bias by guaranteeing publication before results are known. This guarantee is considered attractive in the prevailing  publish or perish culture. But would researchers always prefer such a low-risk option? When strong results allow publication in prestigious journals, the results-dependent nature of standard publications can actually be an advantage for authors. Given this trade-off, the choice between publication formats represents decision making under risk, and researchers may not always be risk-averse. To better understand under which circumstances Registered Reports are likely to be popular, we draw on risk-sensitivity theory from behavioural ecology and develop an agent-based model that explores how four factors shape publication strategies: whether additional publications yield diminishing or increasing career returns, the pace at which studies are completed, publication targets, and competition. We find that many realistic configurations lead researchers to avoid Registered Reports, even when Registered Reports are nearly as valuable as the best possible standard publication. Intense competition and low empirical pace can make the format unviable, while high empirical pace attenuates most other effects. Given prevailing career incentives in many fields, these results suggest that the market share of Registered Reports may remain trivially low without additional incentives or interventions.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Scheel, A. M., Tiokhin, L., Lakens, D. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.17.739248</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Career incentives make Registered Reports unattractive under realistic academic conditions]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.15.738584v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Uptake and Implementation of Multiverse-style Analyses Across 613 Studies 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.15.738584v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Empirical conclusions can depend on the many individual choices researchers make when analyzing data. Multiverse-style analyses address this by computing results across a set of specifications rather than a single one, but it is unclear how widely they are being used and how they are being implemented. We searched the Web of Science Core Collection (May 2026) for articles citing six foundational papers on different variants of multiverse-style methods and classified each of the citing articles as implementing such methods or only discussing them. For implementations, we recorded the framework used, the number of specifications, which of four decision nodes (measurement, data processing, modeling, and estimation) were varied, and other aspects such as how results were visualized and interpreted. Of the 1545 classifiable articles, 613 (39.7%) implemented a multiverse-style analysis (primarily multiverse n = 336, specification curve n = 175, vibration of effects n = 20, multimodel n = 59, and multi-analyst/many-analyst n = 23). Uptake spanned many disciplines, most often psychology (39.8%), the social sciences (20.7%), and medicine (19.2%). The number of specifications ranged from fewer than ten to more than ten thousand (median = 144, IQR 24-1248). Modeling (75%) and data-processing (62%) choices were included most often. Interpretation was predominantly descriptive, whereas formal inference (10.5%), preregistration (8.6%), and explicit attention to the defensibility of specifications (3.9%) were uncommon. Multiverse-style analyses are increasingly becoming established across the quantitative sciences, but some implementation practices can be strengthened so that these analyses become more fully transparent and more genuinely informative about the robustness of research findings.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Nepomuceno, A., Ghosal, A., Sandoval Lentisco, A., Ioannidis, J. P. A. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.15.738584</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Uptake and Implementation of Multiverse-style Analyses Across 613 Studies]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.739022v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Who Funds Open Data Sharing? Analysis of data availability statements in biomedical publications 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.17.739022v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Open data sharing is increasingly mandated by research funders, journals, and institutions, yet large-scale compliance measurement remains challenging. We analyzed 951,949 open access biomedical research articles published between January 2024 and June 2025 using a dual-source pipeline: PDF-based text extraction (MinerU) where PDFs were available and PMC XML otherwise, followed by algorithmic detection of data sharing statements (oddpub v7.2.3), enriched with funder, journal, and institutional metadata from OpenAlex. The corpus included 294,172 PDF-covered articles (30.9%) and 657,777 XML-only articles (69.1%). We found an over-all open data rate of 8.7%, rising to 11.7% among funder-linked articles (those with at least one funder identified in the metadata). Rates varied more than tenfold across the research ecosystem: leading major funders reached observed open data rates of 20-24%, while top journals reached observed rates of 70-86%, with corrected estimates as high as 92.9% (Nature Genetics) after adjusting for XML-only coverage limitations. PDF-based detection identified approximately 52% more data sharing statements than XML-based methods on the same articles. These observed rates differ markedly across funders and journals, and current overall sharing remains far below universal compliance. These patterns provide an empirical baseline against which future policy changes can be measured. An interactive dashboard at https://www.opensciencemetrics.org enables stakeholders to explore and benchmark these results.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Lawrimore, J., Li, C., Moraczewski, D., Poline, J.-B., Thomas, A. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.17.739022</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Who Funds Open Data Sharing? Analysis of data availability statements in biomedical publications]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.15.738744v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Negligible participation in the scientific literature of AI unicorn startups 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.15.738744v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Artificial intelligence (AI) development is concentrated within private firms, yet their participation in scientific publishing remains poorly understood. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of all 317 AI unicorn startups (1998-2025). Only 1,389 eligible peer-reviewed publications and 688 preprints involving some leading startup contributions were identified. More than half of startups (52.4%) produced no qualifying scientific output, and only 24 firms (7.6%) produced any highly cited papers ([&ge;]200 citations). Scientific influence was highly concentrated: the top 10% of firms accounted for 96.8% of citations, while three startups accounted for 92 of 134 firm-attributed highly cited papers. Firm valuation was not associated with publication productivity or highly cited output, whereas funding raised showed weak associations. Overall, participation in formal scientific communication among AI unicorn startups is negligible, comprising only 0.1% of the overall AI literature in 2025. Most leading developers of AI technology do not engage with the scientific literature, raising concerns for the transparency, reproducibility, and accountability of this rapidly moving innovation frontier.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Loisel, Q. E. A., Sandoval Lentisco, A., Ioannidis, J. E. A. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.15.738744</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Negligible participation in the scientific literature of AI unicorn startups]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-16</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.14.736897v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
The Unlabeled Organ: Adipose tissue and normativity in anatomy and physiology texts 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.14.736897v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Adipose tissue is a dynamic and essential organ system with roles in metabolism, endocrine signaling, immune function, thermoregulation, and structural support. Despite this, it has historically been framed as inert or pathological, raising questions about how it is represented in biomedical education. We evaluated the visual and textual representation of adipose tissue across widely used anatomy, physiology, and combined anatomy-physiology textbooks. Images were coded for presence, labeling, and degree of representation, and text mentions of "adipose" and "fat" were quantified across functional contexts. In anatomy textbooks, adipose tissue was frequently present (6.6-21.7% of images) but rarely labeled (<5% of all images; <25% of adipose-containing images). Representation was often minimal or incidental, and text descriptions were predominantly non-functional, with a preference for the term "fat." In physiology textbooks, adipose tissue was more often described in functional terms and more frequently referred to as "adipose," particularly in metabolic contexts, but appeared in relatively few images (<5%) and was typically minimally depicted. Combined anatomy-physiology texts showed intermediate patterns but retained low labeling rates and limited integration of structure and function. Across all textbook types, terminology varied by context, with "fat" more common in non-functional and obesity-related descriptions and "adipose" associated with metabolic functions, suggesting context-dependent bias in terminology. Overall, adipose tissue is present but inconsistently framed across visual and textual domains. This fragmentation may limit recognition of adipose tissue as an integrated organ system and may reinforce reductive or stigmatizing interpretations. Aligning educational representations with current scientific understanding is therefore essential to support a more accurate and integrated view of adipose tissue as a dynamic organ system.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hermsmeyer, I. D. K., MacDougald, O. A., Orczykowski, M. E. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-17</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.14.736897</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Unlabeled Organ: Adipose tissue and normativity in anatomy and physiology texts]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-17</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.13.737239v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
SpaceBio Knowledge Hub: A LiteratOmics Platform for Microgravity and Space Biology Research 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.13.737239v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Space biology literature is growing exponentially. Existing infrastructure has not kept pace with organizing, synthesizing, and disseminating this knowledge. We present SpaceBio SpaceBio Knowledge Hub (www.spacebio.space), an integrated digital ecosystem that combines artificial intelligence, real-time data integration, and open-access infrastructure to advance research, education, and collaboration in microgravity, space biology and space exploration. The platform applies AI-driven approaches including natural language processing, machine learning, and automated content generation to construct a semantic atlas of the field. The atlas reveals the hierarchical thematic organization underlying microgravity-induced biological responses, space mission infrastructure, planetary science, and astrobiology. As part of this effort, SpaceBio is moving toward the construction of a LiteratOmics framework for microgravity, and space biology a systematic, AI-enabled approach to mining, integrating, and structuring the primary literature generated by omics-driven spaceflight research, treating the scientific literature itself as a navigable data layer alongside genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic datasets. Built on a scalable, cloud-based architecture with a user-centered interface, SpaceBio supports literature exploration, data integration, and knowledge discovery for researchers, educators, students, industry partners, and citizen scientists. The platform also functions as a community-building ecosystem. It integrates hands-on research initiatives, AI-generated educational content, pilot data science projects, and social responsibility programs that broaden participation without compromising scientific rigor. AI-enabled digital environments can transform fragmented literature into a navigable knowledge landscape. SpaceBio accelerates research productivity, strengthens STEM education, and supports the global space life sciences community as human space exploration enters in the most ambitious era.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Silva, J. C. F., Vieira, A., Chue Donahey, M. S., Silva, S. M. d. C., Veloso, T., Lopes, A., Sexson, N., Barker, R., Porterfield, D. M., Silva, C. A., Dias, R. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-14</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.13.737239</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[SpaceBio Knowledge Hub: A LiteratOmics Platform for Microgravity and Space Biology Research]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-14</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736808v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Instructor Perspectives on Challenging Topics in Evolution Education and Their Implications for Game-Based Learning 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736808v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Evolution is a foundational framework for understanding biology, yet it remains challenging to teach and learn. Game-based learning may offer one way to support evolution instruction by helping students visualize abstract, dynamic, and difficult-to-observe processes. In this study, we interviewed undergraduate biology instructors to examine how they evaluated video games as potential tools for evolution education, including which topics they perceived as most challenging for students. We found that instructors were broadly open to using video games for evolution instruction, particularly when games could support population-level reasoning, evolutionary mechanisms, speciation and phylogeny, quantitative reasoning, and long time scales. Instructors also emphasized that games must be scientifically accurate, accessible, and aligned with course learning goals. This study contributes an instructor-centered perspective to evolution education and game-based learning research by identifying how instructors connect persistent student learning challenges with potential design priorities for educational video games.

Graphical Abstract

O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=113 SRC="FIGDIR/small/736808v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1">
View larger version (24K):
org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@10a36f9org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@19f1804org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1e1e0aeorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@65c9b4_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP  M_FIG C_FIG
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Otto, J. L., Goulet, L., Kopack Ware, B., Lowry, H., Miller, A.-E., Botello, J. D., Pruett, J. E., Beatty, A. E. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-10</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.06.736808</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Instructor Perspectives on Challenging Topics in Evolution Education and Their Implications for Game-Based Learning]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736686v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Peer-Led Leadership, Mentoring and Promotion: Conversations Among Female Academics from South Africa, Ghana and the United Kingdom 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736686v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Here, we report a one-day, cross-cultural, peer-led workshop at the University of Stellenbosch, facilitated by academics from South Africa, Ghana and the United Kingdom. The focus was on leadership, mentoring and promotion. Using short, structured activities alongside small-group discussion, the participants were encouraged to reflect on leadership, mentoring and the perceived gap between being "ready" and being "recognised" for promotion. Descriptive survey findings and free-text reflections highlight the demand for structured peer support, reciprocal mentoring opportunities, and clearer, more transparent promotion processes. Following the event, we performed a structured review of the impact. This highlighted that the workshop participants reported that the event allowed for greater self-awareness into their own leadership approaches, a stronger commitment to purposeful mentoring, and greater confidence and renewed motivation to take concrete steps towards promotion.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Elson, J. L., Venter, M., Sinxadi, P., Enos, J. Y., Atobrah, D., Mensah, G. I., Pretorius, E., Guthrie, S., Pienaar, I. S. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-10</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.06.736686</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Peer-Led Leadership, Mentoring and Promotion: Conversations Among Female Academics from South Africa, Ghana and the United Kingdom]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.05.736636v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
A Comparative Study of MBTI and Learning Style- Based Grouping for Enhancing Group Effectiveness and Balance in a Pedagogical Setting 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.05.736636v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Effective group work is central to Problem-Based Learning (PBL) in higher education, yet the optimal strategy for forming student groups remains unclear. This study compared MBTI-based grouping, informed by personality types and Keirsey temperaments, with Learning Style-Based (LSB) grouping, grounded in Kolbs Experiential Learning Theory, to assess their impact on group functioning and role performance. Participants were undergraduate students enrolled in Cell Biology (Fall 2022 and Fall 2023) and Introduction to Biology Laboratory (Fall 2023) courses. Students completed MBTI and Kolb Learning Style assessments, and groups and roles (Leader, Communicator, Organizer) were assigned accordingly. Results indicated that LSB-based groups consistently outperformed MBTI-based groups across multiple performance metrics, including productivity, listening, sense of safety, belonging, and overall satisfaction. All metrics showed statistically significant decreases in MBTI-based groups except contribution, which did not differ significantly between grouping strategies. Role performance ratings were significantly higher for Leaders and Communicators in LSB groups, while no significant differences were observed for the Organizer role. Correlation analyses revealed that satisfaction was strongly associated with perceived productivity in MBTI-based groups, whereas in LSB-based groups, satisfaction was more strongly correlated with psychological safety. These findings suggest that learning style alignment may better support effective collaboration and group climate in PBL settings than personality-based grouping.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Nasik, B., Nifoussi, S. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-09</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.07.05.736636</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Comparative Study of MBTI and Learning Style- Based Grouping for Enhancing Group Effectiveness and Balance in a Pedagogical Setting]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-09</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.29.732987v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
A National Survey of 205 Canadian Biomedical Research Core Facilities Reveals Structural Challenges and Opportunities for Strengthening Canada's Research Ecosystem 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.29.732987v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
BackgroundCanadian biomedical core facilities (BCFs) provide researchers with access to advanced tools and unique technical expertise, essential for research. However, their role, sustainability, and impact remain poorly understood. We report on the evolution of model and existing state of Canadas 205 BCFs, examining challenges and benefits.

MethodsCross referencing of national databases by the Canadian Innovation Fund (CFI), and from data collected by the Canadian Network of Scientific Platforms (CNSP) allowed he identification of BCFs. Hand curation of these lists validated that cores are operational. To ensure cores not listed by CFI/CNSP were captured, research intensive institutions in Canada were independently searched to identify active cores.

ResultsThere are currently 205 active and operational BCFs located across 9 provinces, which can be further stratified into 9  technical domains that describe the nature of services they provide. Quebec (80 cores) and Ontario (75 cores) have the highest confluence of BCFs, with Quebec having a higher ratio of cores per capita.

ConclusionsWhile our data establishes the ubiquity of Canadian BCFs, we highlight substantial challenges including sustainability, governance, evaluation and the recognition of support for core scientists. Here, we establish a framework to address these challenges and to inform best practice, to optimize creation of impactful, accessible and functional biomedical core facilities.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Ring, B., Hindmarch, C. C. T., Archer, S. L. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-05</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.29.732987</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A National Survey of 205 Canadian Biomedical Research Core Facilities Reveals Structural Challenges and Opportunities for Strengthening Canada's Research Ecosystem]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-05</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.29.735371v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Linguistic Analysis of Chinese Oral Performance in Different Tasks of Chinese Second Language Learners and Native Speakers 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.29.735371v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
This study investigated how different forms of task influence the oral performance of Chinese second-language learners and native speakers. By analyzing data from 40 Chinese second-language learners and 40 native speakers through picture description tasks, formal and informal questions, and questions with different emotions (happy and unhappy), it was found that different task characteristics significantly affected language performance. Short picture tasks led to higher communication efficiency and noun rates but more errors, while long story tasks showed higher verb rates, function word rates, etc. Formal questions had more characters and nouns but lower communication efficiency compared to informal ones. Also, happy emotion questions resulted in fewer characters, sentences, and errors than unhappy emotion questions. These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of task-based language performance in Chinese as a second language and offer practical implications for teaching, textbook compilation, and student evaluation.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Gao, Y., Zhang, L. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-03</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.29.735371</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Linguistic Analysis of Chinese Oral Performance in Different Tasks of Chinese Second Language Learners and Native Speakers]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-03</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.26.734852v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Quantifying structural vulnerabilities and resilience to research integrity risks in biomedical research networks 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.26.734852v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Retractions of scientific articles reflect a rising research integrity risk in biomedical research, and continued citation of retracted articles poses a downstream risk to research that built upon unreliable studies. Few studies have examined the structural risk factors embedded in how the research enterprise is organized. Here, we apply an analytical risk assessment framework to structural risk factors associated with retracted articles and the propagation of their citations to ten broad fields of biomedical research, collectively accounting for 14% of biomedicine. We pronounced field-specific differences in retraction rates and citations to retracted articles, and show that multiple retractions from single authors occur far more often than chance would predict. By subdividing fields into finer-grained topics with machine learning network clustering, we find that individual authors can reach large proportions of the literature within their topics through citations, and that retraction risk is positively associated with author productivity. Across these fields, 22% of the literature cites authors with at least one retracted article, and 6% cite work from authors with multiple prior retractions. Together, these factors lead to a concentration of risk within topics, which is only partially explained by the uneven distribution of authors with multiple retractions. Despite these quantifiable vulnerabilities, the risk has not yet been fully realized: most topics cite retracted work no more than baseline. Our findings thus reveal both a latent network vulnerability to the rapid dissemination of questionable results and a measurable resilience that has so far kept this possibility in check. The scientific community would particularly benefit from targeted efforts to test and strengthen reproducibility in high-risk scientific topics.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Pan, Z., Hutchins, B. I. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.26.734852</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Quantifying structural vulnerabilities and resilience to research integrity risks in biomedical research networks]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.30.735556v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Tracking claim changes from preprint to publication across 72,644 biomedical studies using large language models 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.30.735556v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Preprints now disseminate a large share of biomedical research before peer review. Because they have not yet passed peer review, some scientists regard preprint claims as unverified or potentially unreliable, yet how much those claims change before publication has so far been quantified only in smaller cohorts, with results that vary by field and topic. Here, we compiled every bioRxiv preprint posted between 2018 and 2025 that we could match by DOI to a peer-reviewed published version, yielding 72,644 preprint-publication pairs. Using a large language model (Claude Sonnet 4.6), we parsed every preprint-publication abstract pair into one primary and two secondary claims, and classified each pair for content change (unchanged, minor, major) and hedging shift (more cautious, more confident, unchanged). On a validation subsample, the model agreed with two independent domain experts about as well as the experts agreed with each other (Cohens kappa 0.63 to 0.66). The primary claim was unchanged in 39.9% of abstracts, minorly revised in 50.0%, and substantially revised in only 10.2%. Hedging shifts were uncommon and asymmetric, with twice as many claims becoming more cautious as more confident (8.4% vs 4.2%). Major revisions were more frequent after long peer review (14.1% in the slowest versus 7.0% in the fastest tertile of review time) and declined over the study period (17.0% in 2019 to 5.7% in 2024). Over the same period, biomedical papers that were never posted as preprints were retracted at roughly twice the rate of those that were. Together, these data show that the move from preprint to peer-reviewed publication leaves the central claims of most biomedical abstracts intact, indicating that preprints are a reliable source of biomedical research.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Yin, H., Rust, R. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-07-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.30.735556</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Tracking claim changes from preprint to publication across 72,644 biomedical studies using large language models]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.21.733226v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Let's Be Black Excellence: How Black Students Navigate Exclusionary and Affirming Racialized Peer Interactions in Active Learning College Science Classrooms 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.21.733226v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Racial equity remains a critical challenge in postsecondary science education, as Black students experience higher attrition rates and diminished well-being compared to their White peers. While active learning has been shown to reduce failure rates and narrow achievement gaps, the interpersonal affordances and constraints of peer discussions within these settings remain underexplored for Black students. Grounded in Critical Race Theory and utilizing the analytical lenses of racial microaggressions, microaffirmations, and Community Cultural Wealth, this study addresses this issue by investigating the racialized interpersonal experiences of Black students in active learning college science classrooms. Through semi-structured interviews, this study explores the nature of both exclusionary and affirming peer interactions and how students navigate these dynamics. Findings reveal that Black students frequently encounter racialized microaggressions--manifestations of macro-level anti-Blackness-- in the classroom which contribute to isolation and racial battle fatigue. Conversely, students describe instances of microaffirmations, predominantly through small counterspaces created by and for other students of color, which validate their intellectual contributions and foster a sense of belonging. Despite facing these tensions, participants advocate for active learning as a beneficial practice, provided that instructors implement explicit, equitable structures and facilitate culturally responsive classroom climates. These findings offer actionable implications for researchers and practitioners to design more inclusive active learning environments by explicitly addressing interpersonal dynamics, promoting cultural competence, and co-constructing humanizing science classroom climates.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Russo-Tait, T., Nichols, H. M., Swanson, T. C. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.21.733226</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Let's Be Black Excellence: How Black Students Navigate Exclusionary and Affirming Racialized Peer Interactions in Active Learning College Science Classrooms]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-29</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.15.731690v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Black women undergraduates' perspectives on how mentors and role models shape their beliefs about the attainability of science research careers 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.15.731690v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Undergraduate research experiences offer important paths into scientific research careers, yet students do not experience them uniformly. For Black women, these experiences occur within racialized and gendered environments that may shape whether they perceive research careers as attainable. Yet little is known about these influences, including how mentors, role models, and institutional contexts, could support or limit Black womens beliefs about research career attainability. To advance our understanding of these influences, we conducted interviews with 23 Black women who participated in undergraduate research at 18 institutions in the United States, including historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and predominantly White institutions (PWIs). We conducted qualitative content analysis to understand Black women undergraduate researchers perceptions of the attainability of a scientific research career, including the influences of their mentors, role models, and institutional context. Three main themes emerged. First, Black women undergraduates varied in the importance they placed on sharing racial and gender identities with mentors and role models; some viewed such similarities as highly meaningful while others described them as less influential. Second, Black women undergraduates described that mentors and role models who shared similar life experiences, values, attitudes, or beliefs contributed to perceptions that scientific research careers were attainable, regardless of gender or racial similarity. Third, institutional context (HBCU, PWI) shaped how mentoring and role modeling influenced Black women undergraduates perceptions of research career attainability. We conclude by offering recommendations for individuals seeking to support Black women in undergraduate research and in their pursuit of research careers.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Joseph, W., Dolan, E. L., Tuma, T. T. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-17</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.15.731690</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Black women undergraduates' perspectives on how mentors and role models shape their beliefs about the attainability of science research careers]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-17</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.10.731420v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
High school science fair: Characterizing student communication and presentation practices and their association with SEF outcomes 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.10.731420v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating Information is one of the eight Science and Engineering Practices in the National Research Council framework that underlies Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). Scientific inquiry requires evaluation and communication of research findings. These skills are part of scientific inquiry itself. The goal of this study was to characterize the communication practices students used during Science and Engineering Fairs (SEFs). To examine these practices, we included the following question in our online anonymous and voluntary national high school SEF surveys carried out during 2021-22 and 2022-23, "What types of communication and presentation skills did you use in your science fair project?" The possible answers were literature review; research notebook; software to prepare tables, graphs, or images; written report; poster board preparation; PowerPoint presentation; and interview with the judges. Literature review and research notebook are part of developing research questions and data collection. Software to prepare tables, graphs, or images, and PowerPoint presentation contribute to analyzing research and developing a presentation. Written reports, poster board preparation, and interviews with the judges provide the opportunity to present the findings. Overall, 1789 students answered the question. The percentage of students utilizing these skills ranged from 17.3% doing a literature review to 67.6% preparing a poster board. On average, students indicated the use of three skills. Poster board preparation and interview with the judges were selected by students more than twice as frequently as literature review and research notebook. More positive SEF outcomes were associated with a greater number of skills used by students. Among the different skills, use of a research notebook showed the strongest association. In this paper, we present the findings and discuss implications regarding use of notebooks and other communication and presentation skills in students SEF experiences and engagement with scientific inquiry.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Grinnell, F., Dalley, S., Reisch, J. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.10.731420</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[High school science fair: Characterizing student communication and presentation practices and their association with SEF outcomes]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-12</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.09.730786v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Addressing the Elephant in the Room: A Quantitative Approach to Understanding 'Wild' 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.09.730786v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
The concept of "wild" is poorly defined when applied to non-human animals, despite its central role in conservation, wildlife management and environmental policy. Despite numerous attempts to define "wildness", the distinction between "wild" and "non-wild" remains inconsistently applied. A shared, empirically grounded understanding of wildness would strengthen communication, support policy and legislation, and clarify human attitudes towards wildlife and nature. We assessed whether a shared understanding of wildness exists within the research community. A total of 358 professionals from different fields completed an online survey comprising 44 wildness-related statements along established measures of attitude and acceptability toward wildlife (AATW) and nature-relatedness (NRS). . Exploratory Factor Analysis revealed six components (19 statements): Human-mediated animal availability, Urbanisation, Independence from humans, Human-wildlife perceived conflict, Individual history of wildness, and Feralisation. These factors explained 43.91% of the variance. Mediation analysis showed that urbanisation and human-wildlife perceived conflict shape nature-relatedness by influencing attitudes and acceptability towards wildlife. Respondents demographic and professional backgrounds influenced their conceptualisation of wildness. While there is a shared latent structure of wildness across fields, it is multidimensional. This has implications for developing working definitions applicable to research, policy and practice.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Saggiomo, L., Esattore, B., Castellano Bueno, J., Masilkova, M., Sommese, A., Mazza, V., Gore, S., Chow, P. K. Y. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-11</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.09.730786</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Addressing the Elephant in the Room: A Quantitative Approach to Understanding 'Wild']]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-11</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.07.730654v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Development of an Exploratory Taxonomy for Veterinary Professionals' AI Query Patterns Across Clinical Stages: An Expert Panel Study 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.07.730654v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Background/ObjectivesThe integration of large language model (LLM)-based AI tools into veterinary clinical practice is rapidly increasing; however, no systematically derived taxonomy of veterinary AI query patterns has been established. This study aimed to develop and refine an exploratory taxonomy of veterinary AI query patterns across clinical stages through a structured expert-panel review process.

MethodsAn exploratory cross-sectional expert panel study was conducted. 5,372 real-world query logs from a veterinary clinical AI chatbot deployed over eight months were analyzed using AI-assisted inductive coding to derive an initial taxonomy. The taxonomy was refined through literature review and subsequently reviewed by an expert panel of 38 veterinary professionals via structured online survey across five clinical stages.

ResultsA taxonomy of 3 categories and 21 subtypes was established: Clinical Support Queries (Types A-H), Evidence-Based Research Queries (Types I-L), and Terminology and Drug Reference Queries (Types M-U). Type B (Differential Reasoning) had the highest overall frequency (57/188 first-choice responses), while Type D (Clinical Decision Support) was dominant immediately post-consultation (55.3%). Veterinary professionals with [&ge;]10 years of experience showed a higher frequency of Type G (Evidence Search) preference than those with <10 years of experience (18 vs. 4), while university-affiliated professionals demonstrated a distinct pattern dominated by Type G.

ConclusionsTo our knowledge, no published study has previously established a veterinary-specific, clinical-stage-sensitive exploratory taxonomy of AI query patterns; this study addresses that gap. The findings provide a foundational framework for designing context-aware, stage-adaptive veterinary AI systems and benchmark evaluation tools.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Huh, C., Huh, H., Ahn, J., Park, M. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-09</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.07.730654</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Development of an Exploratory Taxonomy for Veterinary Professionals' AI Query Patterns Across Clinical Stages: An Expert Panel Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-09</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.02.729548v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Expanded implementation of Fast & Fair paid peer review reduces time to first decision without reducing review quality in a biology journal 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.02.729548v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Traditional peer review is often slowed by delays in identifying willing reviewers and waiting for completed review reports. In a 2024 pilot on the journal Biology Open, we showed that Fast & Fair peer review, which uses pre-contracted paid reviewers and a structured editorial timeline, could deliver rapid, high-quality peer. Here, we report the expanded implementation of Fast & Fair at Biology Open in 2025. From 1 April 2025 onward, all direct submissions to the journal were considered for Fast & Fair peer review unless appropriate pre-contracted reviewer expertise was unavailable. Reviewers were paid {pound}220 per manuscript only if they completed the review on time, and the review met editorial quality expectations. Among peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted in 2025, Fast & Fair reduced time to first decision with reviews from a mean of 37.7 working days under conventional peer review to 5.5 working days. Reviewer commitment also improved. Fast & Fair invitations were accepted more often than conventional invitations (67% versus 23%), had lower nonresponse (13% versus 39%), and had higher completion among accepted invitations (98% versus 87%). Faster review was not associated with reduced review quality. Handling editors scored each review for usefulness in editorial decision-making. Fast & Fair produced fewer low-scoring reports than conventional peer review. Editorial behavior was also unchanged, with similar first-decision profiles and final acceptance rates (59% versus 61%). While financial sustainability remains to be tested at scale, the Fast & Fair model addresses a major bottleneck in traditional peer review by replacing ad hoc reviewer recruitment with conditional compensation, predefined quality standards and a strict editorial timeline.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Gorelick, D. A., Clark, A. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-03</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.06.02.729548</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Expanded implementation of Fast & Fair paid peer review reduces time to first decision without reducing review quality in a biology journal]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-03</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.22.727235v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Sustained Improvements in Student Outcomes Following Integration of Clinical Case Narratives in Veterinary Microbiology Curriculum 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.22.727235v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Microbiology education in veterinary curricula requires students to integrate complex foundational knowledge with clinical application, yet traditional lecture-based approaches often emphasize memorization over higher-order reasoning. In this study, we evaluated the impact of integrating clinically oriented, case-based instruction into a veterinary microbiology course within a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine curriculum. Using a quasi-experimental, multi-year design, student outcomes were compared before (2019, 2021) and after (2022-2025) implementation of case-based teaching while maintaining consistent course content, structure, and assessments. Introduction of clinical case examples was associated with significant and sustained improvements in student evaluations across multiple domains, including perceived relevance, critical thinking, and overall course value. Instructor-related evaluation metrics also improved. Student performance, measured by final course grades, increased following the intervention without evidence of grade inflation. These findings demonstrate that integrating clinically relevant case narratives into microbiology instruction enhances student engagement and student performance. This work highlights a practical and scalable strategy for improving microbiology education, particularly within veterinary and other health-professions curricula.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Eshraghi, A., Logsdon, L. K. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.05.22.727235</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Sustained Improvements in Student Outcomes Following Integration of Clinical Case Narratives in Veterinary Microbiology Curriculum]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.29.728775v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
Forecasting novel therapeutic development in biomedical research 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.29.728775v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Early identification of promising drug research topics is challenging yet crucial for the scientific community to accelerate the development of novel therapeutics. In this work, we leverage large-scale public data from the biomedical literature to extract predictive features to identify promising therapeutic research topics at an early stage. We divide the global citation graph of biomedical literature into a time series of research topics and extract topic features based on citation activity, publication content, and measurable flocking of scientists into novel research topics. Based on these features, our machine learning model identifies research topics that in the future yield Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs years before approval (F1-score of 0.84). 80% of target drugs are predicted in advance, with 65% predicted 8 or more years before approval. This predates the start of phase 2 clinical trials in the vast majority of positive predictions. These results show this approach can efficiently flag research topics generating approved drugs several years prior to approval using public data that would have been contemporaneous at the time of prediction. Thus, reliable forecasting can be accomplished with a high-level view of the publication and citation behavior of scientists, without depending on clinical trial data that may only be deposited with a significant lag. This demonstrates that it is possible to detect early signals of future FDA approved therapies even without any specialized information about these applied research efforts.

TeaserLarge-scale data analysis can use the full set of scientific citations to predict which areas of research will yield new FDA approved drugs, years in advance.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Arabi, S., Hutchins, B. I. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-06-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.05.29.728775</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Forecasting novel therapeutic development in biomedical research]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.28.728385v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
The Hypothesis Race Model for evaluation of research findings 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.28.728385v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST) remains the dominant paradigm for evaluation of empirical research findings in medicine and the social sciences despite concerns about frequent misinterpretations of those findings. Achievement of "statistical significance," the goal of NHST, often beckons unrealistic conclusions. Helpful would be the addition of a broader, Bayesian perspective of research in terms of progressive readjustment of hypothesis credibility from all sources of evidence. For this purpose, the Hypothesis Race Model (HRM) provides an intuitive Bayesian approach that builds upon NHST-concepts, helping to correct misunderstandings with minimal reeducation. The HRM is an extension of the Bayesian approach by Ioannidis in 2005 that helped to explain "why most published research findings are false." It is powerful enough to serve as the foundation for mathematical models to estimate and reduce the cost of empirical hypothesis testing.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Kelly, R. E. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-05-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.05.28.728385</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Hypothesis Race Model for evaluation of research findings]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-05-29</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.24.727542v1?rss=1">
<title>
<![CDATA[
A Stronger Association Between Screen Time and Externalizing Problems in Typically Developing Children than in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder 
]]>
</title>
<link>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.24.727542v1?rss=1
</link>
<description><![CDATA[
Excessive screen use is associated with childhood behavioral problems, but whether associations differ between typically developing (TD) children and those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is unclear. Our cross-sectional study included 108 children aged 5-9 years (61 TD, 47 ASD). ASD was diagnosed using standardized clinical instruments. Measures included parent-reported screen time (excluding TV/DVD), cognitive ability (K-ABC), and behavioral problems (Vineland-II). Screen time and externalizing problems were associated in the TD group (Spearmans {rho} = 0.361, p < 0.01), but not in the ASD group. In the regression model, screen time ({beta} = 0.40, t = 2.60, p < 0.05), ASD status ({beta} = 0.70, t = 8.30, p < 0.001), and their interaction ({beta} = -0.34, t = -2.06, p < 0.05) significantly predicted externalizing problems. Considering the diversity within the autism spectrum, future studies with larger sample sizes should consider individual heterogeneity when examining the association between behavioral outcomes and screen time.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Miyashita, S., Hirosawa, T., Yoshimura, Y., Hasegawa, C., Tanaka, S., Miyagishi, Y., Naito, N., Kikuchi, M. ]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2026-05-28</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>doi:10.64898/2026.05.24.727542</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Stronger Association Between Screen Time and Externalizing Problems in Typically Developing Children than in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2026-05-28</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section></prism:section>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>
