Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 across patients and compared to other respiratory viruses

  1. Damien Jacot
  2. Gilbert Greub
  3. Katia Jaton
  4. Onya Opota

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. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.15.20154518: (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
    Statistical analysis: Data were process with Rstudio and plotted using ggplot2.
    Rstudio
    suggested: (RStudio, RRID:SCR_000432)
    ggplot2
    suggested: (ggplot2, RRID:SCR_014601)

    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:
    Despite these limitations, our laboratory decided to provide quantitative results to clinicians, and these values are 172 now used not only for patient care, but also to define contagiousness, i.e. values below 1000 copies/ml may be considered at low risk of transmission. Of course, decisions about patients isolation inside the hospital is not only based on viral load but also takes into account (i) epidemiological aspects such as the possible exposure of other immunocompromised subjects and (ii) clinical presentation, since a patient with cough and/or nasal discharge will be more contagious.

    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.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • 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.

  2. Version published to 10.1016/j.micinf.2020.08.004
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.15.20154518: (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 variableA higher number of tests was achieved in women than in men (35% of difference); however the rate of positive results was similar for both sex (Fig.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data were process with Rstudio and plotted using ggplot2.
    Rstudio
    suggested: (RStudio, SCR_000432)
          <div style="margin-bottom:8px">
        <div><b>ggplot2</b></div>
        <div>suggested: (ggplot2, <a href="https://scicrunch.org/resources/Any/search?q=SCR_014601">SCR_014601</a>)</div>
      </div>
    </td></tr></table>

    Data from additional tools added to each annotation on a weekly basis.

    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 is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.15.20154518 on medRxiv