Lack of evidence for infectious SARS-CoV-2 in feces and sewage
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.11.21256886: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Human subjects: This study has been approved by the ethics committee of the Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (Valencia, Spain) to use patient samples, including urine and feces.
Consent: Informed consent was obtained from each patient.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Cell Line Authentication not detected. Table 2: Resources
Experimental Models: Cell Lines Sentences Resources Vero E6 cells were inoculated at 70% confluence with diluted and undiluted fecal or wastewater samples. Vero E6suggested: NoneSoftware and Algorithms Sentences Resources RT-qPCR on nasopharyngeal swabs was performed at the hospital … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.11.21256886: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Human subjects: This study has been approved by the ethics committee of the Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (Valencia, Spain) to use patient samples, including urine and feces.
Consent: Informed consent was obtained from each patient.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Cell Line Authentication not detected. Table 2: Resources
Experimental Models: Cell Lines Sentences Resources Vero E6 cells were inoculated at 70% confluence with diluted and undiluted fecal or wastewater samples. Vero E6suggested: NoneSoftware and Algorithms Sentences Resources RT-qPCR on nasopharyngeal swabs was performed at the hospital following internal guidelines using different commercial available kits (BioFire® Respiratory Panel 2.1 (BioFire Defense LLC and BioFire Diagnostics LLC), Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 assay (Abbott Molecular), and Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct (DiaSorin Molecular LLC)). Abbottsuggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.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.
-
