- \n
- eLife <\/em>adopted a \u2018reviewed preprint\u2019 publishing model in 2023, publishing all reviewed papers, regardless of reviewer recommendation.<\/li>\n
- Clarivate has since updated its policies to no longer provide impact factors for journals that publish papers that are not endorsed by peer review.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thepublicationplan.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/AdobeStock_1047908656.jpeg?resize=1024%2C640&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\nAs reported in Research Professional News<\/a>, the non-profit research journal eLife<\/em><\/a> will not receive an impact factor rating from Web of Science<\/a> in 2025, following implementation of a new policy by Web of Science provider Clarivate. Under eLife\u2019s <\/em>\u2018reviewed preprint<\/a>\u2019 model adopted in 2023, all submitted research papers that undergo peer review are published, regardless of whether reviewers recommended them for publication. In response to the growing trend of journals decoupling publication from peer review<\/a>, Clarivate introduced its policy to index only content that is validated by peer review. \u200b<\/p>\n
\n
\u201c[Clarivate\u2019s policy] reflects<\/em> our commitment to support the integrity of the scholarly record through curation and selectivity in the Web of Science.\u201d \u2013 <\/em>Nandita Quaderi, editor-in-chief, Web of Science<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
eLife<\/em>, a signatory of the Declaration on Research Assessment<\/a>, opposes the reliance on metrics<\/a> like the impact factor and has reiterated its commitment to meaningful research assessment, stating that its model is closer to the ideal of how scientific discourse should work.<\/p>\n
This development will inevitably spark discussion about the pros and cons of traditional metrics in research assessment. eLife\u2019<\/em>s innovative model challenges the conventional take on peer review, prompting the scientific community to reconsider how best to measure research impact and quality. As the peer review and publishing landscape evolves, this case underscores the need for ongoing dialogue about practices that best serve the advancement of science.<\/p>\n
\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2013<\/p>\n
- Clarivate has since updated its policies to no longer provide impact factors for journals that publish papers that are not endorsed by peer review.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thepublicationplan.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/Dan-Binks_new-byline.png?resize=1024%2C125&ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\n