Investigating the relationship between interventions, contact patterns, and SARS-CoV-2 transmissibility

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 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265876: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    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:
    When interpreting our results, the following limitations should be considered. Firstly, the analyzed sample is affected by a strong selection bias. Indeed, study participants were enrolled among individuals who voluntarily registered to undergo a serological test. In addition, the conducted survey was restricted to the population of the metropolitan city of Milan. Consequently, our sample is not representative of the age distribution and of the household composition of the Italian population and results may not reflect social behavior adopted in less urbanized areas. In particular, crude estimates retrieved from our sample suggest that, in August 2020 (i.e., before introducing the tiered restriction system), the daily mean number of contacts was 74.5% lower than that estimated for Italy by the POLYMOD study in 2008 [18]. Although it is likely that, even in the absence of strong restrictions, current social interactions could strongly differ from those adopted in the pre-pandemic period [25], these numbers should be considered in light of the sampling procedure we adopted for data collection. For this reason, instead of relying on absolute numbers, our analysis focuses on investigating the relative changes in the contact patterns observed across different time periods and at different ages. To minimize potential biases, the potential impact of tier restrictions on the number of reported contacts was assessed by adopting a regression model, where a variety of potential confound...

    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.


    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.