Concordance of SARS-CoV-2 Results in Self-collected Nasal Swabs vs Swabs Collected by Health Care Workers in Children and Adolescents
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.03.07.22270699: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Consent: Ethics statement: All studies were approved by the Emory University IRB and all participants provided consent (and assent, where indicated by age) prior to participating. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There are a few limitations to the work presented. Data comparing SARS-CoV-2 detection in …
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.03.07.22270699: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Consent: Ethics statement: All studies were approved by the Emory University IRB and all participants provided consent (and assent, where indicated by age) prior to participating. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There are a few limitations to the work presented. Data comparing SARS-CoV-2 detection in self-versus HCW-collected samples were limited to symptomatic participants, and there was not sufficient statistical power to detect small differences in SARS-CoV-2 detection by year of age. There was only one asymptomatic child who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, which did result in positive results for both self- and HCW-collected samples. Further testing should be done to confirm that self-collection is effective for SARS-CoV-2 testing in an asymptomatic pediatric population. Given the similar performance of self- and HCW-collected AN swabs, data from the current study support the development of SARS-CoV-2 testing plans for school aged children that allow for self-collection. Such strategies have the potential to improve testing capacity by decreasing the need for trained staff at collection sites, and future work could evaluate the use of self-collected samples for multiplex respiratory viral testing to reduce outbreaks in this population.
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
