Characteristics Associated With Racial/Ethnic Disparities in COVID-19 Outcomes in an Academic Health Care System

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.16.20133140: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot 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:
    This study has several limitations. First, we may not have captured all hospitalized patients given that only about half (48.3%) of the positive cohort had primary care at MM. It is possible that some of the “not hospitalized” patients actually were hospitalized elsewhere. Second, we did not consider the transfer patients from other hospitals as a special sub-group, who often had more severe outcomes. Third, early in COVID-19 course at MM, all COVID-19 patients were placed in regional infectious containment unit (RICU), some of which did not require ICU-level care. We suggest future study to define ICU patients using requirement of mechanical ventilators. Fourth, one may argue that the untested MM controls are intrinsically different than the tested cohort and do not serve as proper controls and may impact the estimation of the ORs observed in the susceptibility models. In the future, when testing is abundantly available, we may be able to restrict the patient population only to the catchment of MM or those who seek primary care at MM and exclude transfer patients. However, this is only a limitation in susceptibility models, and, the prognosis-outcome models only focused on the tested positive cohort and did not use the untested controls and thus, are not subject to the same selection issues. Lastly, the study results should be interpreted cautiously for generalizability given the demographics varies by region and by countries.

    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.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.