Clinical Outcomes, Costs, and Cost-effectiveness of Strategies for Adults Experiencing Sheltered Homelessness During the COVID-19 Pandemic

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 10.1101/2020.08.07.20170498: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The analysis Human Research Committee.
    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 analysis has limitations. The findings are specific to individual adults; we excluded adults experiencing homelessness as part of a family, because family shelters more likely provide private living quarters.38 We also excluded unsheltered homeless individuals because disease transmission dynamics and infection control considerations are distinct for this subpopulation.39 We assumed homogeneous mixing of sheltered homeless adults; in reality this population is spread over numerous shelters. This homogenous mixing assumption may impact the number of infections projected by our model, but we expect this impact to be small. In the base case, we did not assume increased comorbidities among homeless adults compared with the general population.40 The analysis is based on the possibility that ACSs and PCR tests can be made available relatively quickly to homeless adults. This may be difficult in some settings because those responsible for making ACSs and PCR tests available may not be those responsible for hospital costs, and record-keeping may be challenging. Finally, we focused this analysis on Boston, which has a 29.7% higher cost of living than the US average.41 Costs of temporary housing may be considerably lower in other cities. In sensitivity analysis, however, results were robust to even large changes in testing, hospital, and housing costs. In summary, daily symptom screening and use of ACSs for those with pending test results or mild to moderate COVID-19 was associate...

    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.