Outbreak of COVID-19 and interventions in a large jail — Cook County, IL, United States, 2020

  1. Chad Zawitz
  2. Sharon Welbel
  3. Isaac Ghinai
  4. Connie Mennella
  5. Rebecca Levin
  6. Usha Samala
  7. Michelle Bryant Smith
  8. Jane Gubser
  9. Bridgette Jones
  10. Kate Varela
  11. Uzay Kirbiyik
  12. Josh Rafinski
  13. Anne Fitzgerald
  14. Peter Orris
  15. Alex Bahls
  16. Stephanie R. Black
  17. Alison M. Binder
  18. Paige A. Armstrong

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.ajic.2021.03.020
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.12.20148494: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: This study was reviewed by CDC, CDPH, CCH, and CCSO institutional review boards or the equivalent entity, and deemed not to be research involving human subjects and public health response.
    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 investigation has several limitations. First, testing capacity was limited early in the outbreak, potentially underestimating the number of cases; comprehensively employed mitigation methods reduced transmission even in the absence of full testing capacity. Our case definition required a positive PCR result; this may have excluded staff who were diagnosed clinically, or who had only serology performed. Further, while CCSO staff represented the largest group of staff members entering CCJ, other staff (e.g., healthcare staff) had a wide range of employers with no centralized listing and were not included in the study. Third, since demographic and clinical data were unavailable for cases other than those resulting in death, analyses by race, sex, and age could not be conducted. Lastly, because interventions were often implemented simultaneously, it was difficult to ascertain relative effectiveness.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.12.20148494 on medRxiv