Q: How can we manage submission settings to keep our manuscript private?
Recently, we submitted our manuscript, and it was unintentionally published at Research Square via Springer Nature’s “In Review” service. This is despite being under review. It does mention that we can opt out the service, however this was missed, and we ended up accepting it. We are not comfortable disclosing our unpublished manuscript, and I understand we need to be very careful about such instances in the future. This is especially with open science and preprints becoming more common. Can you share your insights or advice on preventing such unintended disclosure or any other issues we should be aware of?
Your concern is completely understandable. The instance you're facing is part of a larger shift in academic publishing. Publishers are pushing toward more transparency and early sharing, and they're building these options into their submission systems. The challenge can be that the decision points aren't always clear when you're clicking through a submission form.
First, let’s address Springer Nature’s In Review service. According to Springer Nature's own documentation, preprints posted through In Review cannot be removed. So, when you opt into this service, you’re agreeing that your manuscript will be posted permanently and publicly on the Research Square platform. Once it's posted, it will be available with a DOI and becomes a permanent part of the scholarly record that people can read, cite, and comment on. This feature is seen as beneficial because it gives your work early visibility, allows you to update funders, and enables the broader community to see and potentially comment on new studies. One important thing to note is that opting in or out of In Review does not influence the editorial decision of acceptance of your manuscript. If you submit revisions during the review process and the journal is open access, those revised versions can also be made available as later versions of the preprint. You can refer to this page if you have any specific questions about the In Review service.
The next step would be to ensure that all co-authors are informed about the preprint. In the future, if you choose to submit this manuscript to a different journal, it would be ideal to mention that a preprint version of the manuscript exists and provide the DOI as well.
As journal policies evolve, for future submissions, you may need to approach submission screens differently than before. For instance, you may have to go through every single option where there’s a checkbox. If you encounter any option about sharing, transparency, or making your work available—for example, “participate in transparent peer review” or “make your research available during review”—pause and look up what that means before you proceed. Typically, submission platforms or journal websites will have explanations. However, if the journal website doesn’t explain it clearly, feel free to write to the editor for clarification before making a decision. It’s also a good idea to check each journal’s open-access models and preprint policies in advance to ensure they align with your publication strategy and any institutional or funder mandates.
With preprint servers more broadly, posting is permanent. You may be able to update a preprint with new versions or add a withdrawal notice in cases of withdrawal. However, note that the already submitted version may still be available in the archive with its DOI.
If you have any potential patent considerations or other circumstances where premature public disclosure could create problems, it would help to set up a protocol for submissions. Before you upload anything, get explicit approval from all your co-authors for that specific version, and review every file you’re submitting, including supplementary materials. It would also help to document what you agree to during submission.
We hope this offers some clarity to the situation and some reassurance as you navigate the publishing process.
