Send us a link
This observational study can help researchers and publishers make informed decisions about how to incorporate preprints into their work.
Early career researchers commonly peer review manuscripts on behalf of invited reviewers, often without receiving feedback or being named to the journal.
How can the scientific community support researchers with mental health issues?
What can authors and reviewers do to keep common statistical mistakes out of the literature?
Many authors start with the figures when writing a paper, but it is easier to tell a good story if you start with the Introduction and Results, and leave the figures to later.
Analysis of data on drug-gene interactions suggests that decentralized collaboration will increase the robustness of scientific findings in biomedical research.
The Ben Barres Spotlight Awards will give scientists in underrepresented communities an opportunity to gain visibility for their work and increase collaboration.
ELife announces their roadmap towards an open, scalable infrastructure for the publication of computationally reproducible articles.
JetFighter screens preprints to improve data representation and colour-blind accessibility.
Leading open-access advocate will take eLife forward in its mission to transform publishing in the life and biomedical sciences.
The community-curated website aims to connect early-career researchers with funding opportunities, useful resources and each other.
A project to assess the reproducibility of findings in biomedical science by researchers based in Brazil has been published.
New approach to peer review proves popular with authors, with very similar acceptance rates for male and female last authors, but with higher acceptance rates for late-career researchers compared to their early- and mid-career colleagues.
A new collection page brings together articles that eLife has published in the burgeoning field of meta-research.
The development of a brand-new version of Libero will be governed under a model that puts the community at the heart of the project.
A collaboration between non-profits eLife, Flockademic and the Center for Open Science aims to make open endorsements of research content possible across platforms.
The eLife website now has a dedicated section for plain-language summaries of the latest research.
eLife is conducting an open search for a new Editor-in-Chief to succeed Randy Schekman.
In an era in which evidence is being disregarded, scientists need to speak up in support of the pursuit for truth. If we do not successively train our youth to distinguish between truth and falsehood, we are at risk of raising a new generation unused to recognizing truth as derived from evidence.
Stencila launches the first version of its word processor and spreadsheet editor designed for researchers.
eLife authors are being invited to take part in a trial in which they decide how to respond to the issues raised during peer review.
eLife is conducting a trial in which authors will decide how to respond to the issues raised during peer review.
From gamification of sample-size identification to a decentralised lab notebook: a showcase of the projects developed at the eLife Innovation Sprint.
A report from a short project using natural language processing and machine learning on open-access content to understand what lies beneath a citation.
Many researchers have strong views on peer review. To find out what early-career researchers think we conducted a survey in which we asked 10 questions about different aspects of peer review.
Lucy Patterson reports back from Science Hack Day Berlin.
The Project Jupyter team shares its reboot of Binder, a tool allowing researchers to make their GitHub repositories executable by others.
Scientific careers are built on recognition. It influences every stage of employment, from obtaining your first postdoc to landing an academic position or winning funding.
Leading Swedish research funder joins nonprofit coalition committing about £2.72 mio. to eLife for a 4-year period beginning in 2018.
