Rxivist combines preprints from bioRxiv with data from Twitter to help you find the papers being discussed in your field. Currently indexing 62,725 bioRxiv papers from 278,303 authors.
Over the past 75 years, a number of statisticians have advised that the data-analysis method known as null-hypothesis significance testing (NHST) should be deprecated (Berkson, 1942; Halsey et al., 2015). The limitations of NHST have been extensively discussed, with an emerging consensus that current statistical practice in the biological sciences needs reform. However, there is less agreement on the specific nature of reform, with vigorous debate surrounding what would constitute a suitable alternative (Altman et al., 2000; Benjamin et al., 2017; Cumming and Calin-Jageman, 2016). An emerging view is that a more complete analytic technique would use statistical graphics to estimate effect sizes and their uncertainty (Cohen, 1994; Cumming and Calin-Jageman, 2016). As these estimation methods require only minimal statistical retraining, they have great potential to change the current data-analysis culture away from dichotomous thinking towards quantitative reasoning (Claridge-Chang and Assam, 2016). The evolution of statistics has been inextricably linked to the development of improved quantitative displays that support complex visual reasoning (Tufte, 2001). We consider that the graphic we describe here as an estimation plot is the most intuitive way to display the complete statistical information about experimental data sets. However, a major obstacle to adopting estimation is accessibility to suitable software. To overcome this hurdle, we have developed free software that makes high-quality estimation plotting available to all. Here, we explain the rationale for estimation plots by contrasting them with conventional charts used to display NHST data, and describe how the use of these graphs affords five major analytical advantages.
- Downloaded 16,169 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 39 out of 62,725
- In bioinformatics: 5 out of 6,249
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 36 out of 62,725
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 600 out of 62,725
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- Top preprints of 2018
- Paper search
- Author leaderboards
- Overall metrics
- The API
- Email newsletter
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!