Geographical distance to the epicenter of Covid-19 predicts the burnout of the working population: Ripple effect or typhoon eye effect?

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.02.20051128: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: All respondents agreed to participate in the study, which was approved by the ethics committee at Tongji University (#20200211).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot 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:
    We note our limitations that offer opportunities for future research. The inversed U-shaped relationship that we found was limited to predicting burnout, a psychological syndrome under prolonged social stressors, and it is interesting to examine how the distance to epicenter predicts other mental health outcomes. The inversed U-shaped relationship is also limited to China, which had one clear epicenter in Wuhan, where Covid-19 originated. China is also a geographically large country, where the epicenter of Wuhan happens to be centrally located. Hence, ripple effect and typhoon eye effect may play out differently in other countries with multiple epicenters of Covid-19 (e.g. Washington State and New York State in the US) and distinct geographical features. Nonetheless, our results point to the need for further studies to determine how the two effects may dominate each other in other Covid-19 infected areas to enable better identification of those who are in greater need.

    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.

    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.