Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of our survey respondents had not yet hosted a preprint journal club (Fig. 2a), but encouragingly nearly half were willing to, and 45% might be swayed in that direction with further support and incentives.  
To gain insight from those who had already hosted preprint journal clubs, we asked them if the preprint journal club was a success and if they had any suggestions for improvements. The overall feedback reflected a resounding success, Many reported that preprint journal club's attendees valued the experience of peer review, and several of the respondents sent their comments to authors. However, many also acknowledged that this was a greater time commitment compared to a standard journal club. It was also noted that there is a limited number of field-specific preprints, and that increasing the posting of preprints would overcome this barrier. This is something we hope preprint journal clubs will themselves promote, by revealing the many benefits of preprints for the rapid progression of scientific research. 
Expanding on this notion of obstacles to preprint journal clubs, we asked our participants if they envisioned any barriers or push-back to this practice. Approximately 25% felt there were no barriers to integrating preprints into journal club practices, but several reiterated the lack of available preprints and the need to broaden preprint awareness. Many felt that encouraging attendance would be a challenge because of the increasing number of meetings already encouraged for early-career researchers. Furthermore, many noted that people may not want to invest time in reading and reviewing a manuscript that hasn’t yet undergone peer-review because of supposed low quality of the research. However, many felt that this could be overcome by promoting preprint journal clubs as a training exercise for early-career scientists; this may require faculty buy-in. 
Having a database that lists all academics who are actively posting preprints and/or are pro-preprints, together with their institutional affiliations, would help early-career researchers identify potential faculty mentors to guide them through their preprint reviews. Furthermore, providing resources to train early-career researchers in peer review and facilitating community feedback may provide a sufficient substitute if faculty buy-in becomes a barrier. This type of peer review support is provided at PREreview, and also at Publons AcademyNature MasterclassesElsevier Publishing Campus, and Cochrane Eyes and Vision.