Geographic disparities in COVID-19 case rates are not reflected in seropositivity rates using a neighborhood survey in Chicago

  1. Brian Mustanski
  2. Rana Saber
  3. Daniel T. Ryan
  4. Nanette Benbow
  5. Krystal Madkins
  6. Christina Hayford
  7. Michael E. Newcomb
  8. Joshua M. Schrock
  9. Lauren A. Vaught
  10. Nina L. Reiser
  11. Matthew P. Velez
  12. Ryan R. Hsieh
  13. Alexis R. Demonbreun
  14. Richard D'Aquila
  15. Elizabeth M. McNally
  16. Thomas W. McDade

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  3. Version published to 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.10.006
  4. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.02.21252767: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: All research activities were implemented under conditions of informed consent with protocols approved by the institutional review board of the university where the authors are primarily affiliated.
    IRB: All research activities were implemented under conditions of informed consent with protocols approved by the institutional review board of the university where the authors are primarily affiliated.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableTo assure racial and gender diversity within the sample, enrollment of women and white participants (groups that disproportionately completed the screener) was adaptively matched to enrollment of men and racial-minority participants within each ZIP code.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    We measured antibodies to RBD because previous studies have reported better sensitivity and specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection detection than seen with anti-nucleocapsid antibodies (19, 23-26).
    anti-nucleocapsid
    suggested: None
    Anti-RBD antibodies have infrequent and low-level cross-reactivity to other seasonal human coronaviruses (32, 33), an advantage relative to detection of antibodies to other SARS-CoV-2 proteins.
    Anti-RBD
    suggested: None
    Results were normalized to the CR3022 antibody with known affinity (35).
    CR3022
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Study data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools (28).
    REDCap
    suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)
    Geographical information system (GIS) analyses were conducted using ArcGIS Pro 2.6.2.
    ArcGIS
    suggested: (ArcGIS for Desktop Basic, RRID:SCR_011081)

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Findings must be considered in the context of study limitations. This was not a probability sample, but instead obtained through social and news media, community outreach, and employees of a large medical school. Our goal was not to provide population estimates of seroprevalence, rather we sought to look at relative rates within pairs of carefully selected adjacent ZIP codes with differing case rates. Nevertheless, our estimation of seroprevalence within ZIP codes may be biased by our sampling approach. For example, despite attempts to target recruitment from Black communities, the proportion of Black participants in the study underrepresented the demographics of Chicago. We sought to partially correct for this with sensitivity analyses that included demographic covariates and weighting. Further, individuals who opted to volunteer to participate when reading about the study through widespread coverage in local news, social media ads, or community outreach may not represent the entire community. Second, participants were required to self-collect a DBS sample. Through well-produced videos and collection materials we hoped to minimize concerns, but selection biases may still have operated.

    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.

  5. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.02.21252767v1 on medRxiv