
@jonmsterling @lindsey @JonathanAldrich
A very senior faculty member once told me that "back in the day" (when they were young) an interesting research finding would first get published as a brief note in Nature, and then a year later the lengthy, detailed manuscript with all the data and methods would appear in the Journal of Neurophysiology. And that one wasn't considered a serious scientist if the latter wasn't published, for the former was but the news splash with barely enough substance to understand what the claim was.
Tragic that this separation of concerns has been lost, with everyone now giving more weight to the flashy bit ("significance of findings"), to the point of not bothering to publish the lengthy, detailed, reproducible study ("strength of evidence").
These two axes are what eLife's assessment aims at capturing in a pithy paragraph.