Main COVID-19 information sources in a culturally and linguistically diverse community in Sydney, Australia: A cross-sectional survey

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 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265503: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study was approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis was conducted using Complex Sample procedures in IBM SPSS Statistics 26.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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:
    Strengths and limitations: The main strength of this study is that we addressed deficiencies in previous research by using more inclusive recruitment and data collection methods to increase opportunity for participation. This included providing translated versions of the survey, using interpreters, and multiple recruitment methods (including through social media, community events, and through community networks). We also included several variables related to culture and language (e.g. English language proficiency, literacy in own language, and years living in Australia), and focused on 10 specific language groups, in an attempt to provide a more nuanced description of the sample that captures some of the complexity and diversity within these communities. Whilst this inevitably means that not all cultural and language groups are represented in the survey, we hope that that by focusing on 10 groups with different access to translated materials, English language skills and proficiency in language spoken at home, that the findings have practical value and can inform decision-making to develop tailored supports and resources that serve these communities. This study also did not ask participants if they had already received the vaccine. State-wide estimates suggest fewer than 25 per 100 NSW population had received a single dose of the vaccine at the time recruitment closed(covid19data.com.au, 2021). Lastly, we were unable to incorporate specific items about the Astrazeneca vaccine ...

    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.

  2. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265451: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study was approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis was conducted using Complex Sample procedures in IBM SPSS Statistics 26
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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:
    Strengths and limitations: This study is strengthened by recruitment methods that are inclusive and reduce barriers to participation, such as translated versions of the survey, use of interpreters, and use of multiple recruitment methods (including through social media, community events, and through community networks). Further, by including several variables related to culture and language (e.g. English language proficiency, literacy in own language, and years living in Australia), and focusing on 10 specific language groups (more detail provided in our community summaries) (Appendix 3), this study provides a more nuanced understanding of the sample, providing more practical avenues of action to support these communities. This is in stark contrast to many studies which are only able to provide data on e.g. language spoke at home or years living in Australia, including our own previous work (McCaffery et al., 2020). Further work could explore experiences within a single language or culture to provide even more specific practical avenues of action. The limitations of the study are that recruitment for some language groups was lower than anticipated (n<50). For these language groups, estimates may be less reliable. In addition, using a relatively simple knowledge measure, we observed high levels of knowledge and self-reported COVID-19 prevention behaviors, and this may have limited our ability to identify important predictors of these outcomes. Future work could consider more d...

    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.

  3. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.29.21261321: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study was approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Analysis plan: Descriptive statistics were used to summarise demographic characteristics and information sources in SPSS Version 25.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.