Arxiv equivalent for medical research article

To elaborate on the answer by ddiez: bioRxiv has been deliberately designed to fill the same sort of role for life sciences that arXiv does for physics, math, and computer science. A key reason for this is the growing recognition amongst some practitioners in these fields that scientific communication is being inhibited by the long time to publication and pre-publication secrecy that is typical in life science fields---it is not uncommon to be hearing privately about work for years before one is able to read the details or cite it. Overall, this is a very good thing: it improves communication, it reduces the chance of being "scooped," and it reduces the "all-or-nothing" pressure associated with targeting super-high-impact journals.

That said, bioRxiv is still fairly new, and the conventions for its relationship with journals are still evolving. Some journals are very supportive and encourage authors to deposit in bioRxiv. Others still tightly embrace the prior publication culture and consider deposit in a preprint repository a prior publication that precludes submission. Check carefully what the policy of the journals that you are targeting with before you make a decision about whether to deposit.


medRxiv: a preprint server for health sciences. https://www.medrxiv.org/


I am not aware of a "pre-print" (I don't mean this term in a derogatory manner) repository for medical research similar to arXiv. I think there are two reasons for this. The first is that my understanding is that the peer review process in medical fields often takes less than a month and rarely more than a year where as in Physics and Maths I think the pattern is reversed. The second reason, and I believe the most important reason, is that medical research studies should be preregistered. The 2013 Declaration of Helsinki states:

Every research study involving human subjects must be registered in a publicly accessible database before recruitment of the first subject.

This requirement has lead to initiatives (or possible vice versa) of trial repositories like bioMed Central where protocols can be peer reviewed and published. While this is very different from arXiv which archives complete studies, it may provide the type of "time stamping" you are looking for.