A standardized instrument quantifying risk factors associated with bi-directional transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other zoonotic pathogens: The COVID-19 human-animal interactions survey (CHAIS)

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles


No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.21.21263227: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot 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:
    Researchers should take into consideration the current limitations of antibody testing, including type of immunoglobulin detection, evolving knowledge of immune response and antibody duration in humans and animals, and accuracy of tests, among others (Mathur & Mathur, 2020; Özçürümez et al., 2020; Theel et al., 2020). Researchers also should consider vaccination status of people and animals and are encouraged to add questions as needed in this regard. Finally, studies conducted in households or other environments (such as zoos) where infected humans have similarly reported interactions with multiple animal species, may build upon laboratory animal model studies by elucidating natural-world differences in susceptibility and transmission patterns. CHAIS as a standard instrument for other zoonotic pathogens: The CHAIS instrument was specifically designed to be adapted to support studies investigating zoonotic and reverse zoonotic transmission of CoV-2 and similarly transmitted pathogens in settings where animals and humans share close contact, such as zoonotic strains of influenza viruses, Chlamydophila felis, Bordetella bronchiseptica, Y. pestis, Streptococcus group A, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), among others (Davis et al., 2012; Defres, Marwick, & Nathwani, 2009; Loeffler A, 2011; Manian, 2003; Rubinstein, Kollef, & Nathwani, 2008; Shrikrishna D, 2009; Trujillo J, 2012). While there may be important pathological and immunological differences between...

    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.