COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy January-May 2021 among 18–64 year old US adults by employment and occupation
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.20.21255821: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: The CMU Institutional Review Board approved the survey protocol and instrument. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization Each month the survey is offered to a random sample, stratified by geographic region, of ≈100 million US residents from the Facebook Active User Base who use one of the supported languages (English [American and British], Spanish [Spain and Latin American], French, Brazilian Portuguese, Vietnamese, and simplified Chinese) via a link at the top of their Facebook News Feed to yield ≈1.3 million responders, which allows for evaluation of local trends. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddP…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.20.21255821: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: The CMU Institutional Review Board approved the survey protocol and instrument. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization Each month the survey is offered to a random sample, stratified by geographic region, of ≈100 million US residents from the Facebook Active User Base who use one of the supported languages (English [American and British], Spanish [Spain and Latin American], French, Brazilian Portuguese, Vietnamese, and simplified Chinese) via a link at the top of their Facebook News Feed to yield ≈1.3 million responders, which allows for evaluation of local trends. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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:Limitations: Our large sample size allowed for precise vaccine hesitancy estimates by month and occupation. However, cross-sectional samples were used to evaluate time trends, and the sample representativeness may have been affected by the recruitment method and response rate, addressed with weighting.7 Compared to the [dataset] American Community Survey 2015-2019 5-year 2 Data Release9, demographics of the weighted sample are similar to the US population, but white race and higher education are slightly over-represented. Thus, overall hesitancy prevalence estimates might be underestimated.3 This should have minimal effects on time trends or comparisons between occupation categories.
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.
-
