Background: The Covid-19 pandemic introduced new complicating factors for the process of scientific publication, such as an unprecedented volume of article submissions. These changes have a potential to significantly alter how scientific communication is done, thus demanding scrutiny. Objective: To assess how the scientific publication system responded to the challenges brought by the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods: The following topics of interest were analyzed with the help of a review of the pertinent scientific literature: a) How were review quality and publication speed affected by the increased volume of Covid-19-related submissions; b) How were Covid-19 retraction and citation rates affected; and c) How was the scientific communication process impacted by the widespread use of “preprints” as a valid (“citable”) source of information. Results: Concerning review quality, a number of extremely dubious articles on Covid-19 treatment managed to be published, some of which in relatively prestigious journals. Regarding retractions (and contrary to initial reports), no increase on retractions rate was evident as time passed and the system reached its “steady state”. As for pre-prints, problems associated with their use are the practice of “retracting” (withdrawing) pre-prints with no adequate retraction standards and how to effectively evaluate pre-print quality. Conclusions: As a whole, the scientific publication system seems to have survived well the unusual circumstances arising from the pandemic; e.g., no increase in retractions rates was observed. Problems remain to be dealt with, particularly regarding the improvement of the peer review quality and the citation / evaluation / retracting of pre-prints.