Spatial and temporal dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.21.20108605: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data sources: We searched the databases MEDLINE/PUBMED and Cochrane Review with the following search terms: “SARS-CoV-2 [MESH]” OR “COVID 19 [MESH]” alone, or in combination with “virology” OR “viral” OR “Epidemio*” AND “clinical”.
    Cochrane Review
    suggested: None
    3 Statistical analysis was conducted in GraphPad Prism 8.1.2.
    GraphPad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Additionally, this study has several limitations which need to be considered. First, different genes and thresholds were used to assess negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 hampering the direct comparison of studies. Second, the classification of clinical symptoms into the severity categories, mild, moderate, severe was based on different guidelines across the studies and we were not able to unify and verify all (mostly due to missing individual symptom data). Third, studies that only reported fractions or median of duration of viral shedding were excluded, which might introduce a selection bias into this review. Fourth, the viral load was measured via RT-PCR, which cannot differentiate dead virus particle, and hence data presented here might not necessarily reflect active viral replication. However, this technique is currently used worldwide to measure the quantities of SARS-CoV-2. Fifth, a portion of the patients included in this review (14 %) did not clear the virus in the time frame of sampling, hence the here presented data might be an underestimation of the duration of virus detection. Finally, our aggregation analysis exhibited a high heterogeneity (I2 ~ 80-90%), which highlights that these data should be interpreted cautiously and only considered as trends. Regardless of these limitations, some trends can be extracted from this analysis. Firstly, we consistently find that SARS-CoV-2 is detected in LRT, URT and fecal specimens, irrespective of clinical severity of disease...

    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.