Factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures in the UK: a cross-sectional survey
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.01.20119040: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethics: Ethical approval for this study was granted by the King’s College London Research Ethics Committee (reference: LRS-19/20-18687). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Power: We calculated achieved power for the analyses (in households with and without symptoms) using post-hoc power calculations. Sex as a biological variable 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 …SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.01.20119040: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethics: Ethical approval for this study was granted by the King’s College London Research Ethics Committee (reference: LRS-19/20-18687). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Power: We calculated achieved power for the analyses (in households with and without symptoms) using post-hoc power calculations. Sex as a biological variable 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:This study has several limitations. First, despite using quota sampling so that personal characteristics of the sample broadly reflected those in the UK general population, we cannot be sure that survey respondents are representative of the general population.(28, 29) Research during disasters and public health crises often require a trade-off between rapidity and rigour.(11) The use of a professional market research agency using industry standard opinion polling methodology provides a suitable balance in these circumstances. Second, all data were self-reported and may have been susceptible to social desirability bias.(30) However, preliminary data indicate that self-reported physical distancing is associated with real-world behaviour.(31) If anything, the rates of adherence we observed may be over-estimates of adherence. Third, we did not ask participants if they came into close contact (within 2 metres) with anyone from another household while they were out and about. We cannot tell if those who went out more, including shopping for non-essentials, were in close contact with more people than those who went out less or who did not go out shopping for non-essentials. However, we reason that those who have been out and about more times have a greater chance of having come into close contact with someone from outside their household. This is only relevant for those who reported no symptoms in their household. For those who reported symptoms in their household, any outing is a b...
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.
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.01.20119040: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethics Ethical approval for this study was granted by the King’s College London Research Ethics Committee ( reference: LRS-19/20-18687) . Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Power We calculated achieved power for the analyses ( in households with and without symptoms ) using post-hoc power calculations Sex as a biological variable • Factors associated with non-adherence to self-isolation measures included being male , less worried about COVID-19 , and perceiving a smaller risk of catching COVID-19 . Table 2: Resources
Results from OddPub: We did not find a statement about open data. We also did not find a statement about …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.01.20119040: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethics Ethical approval for this study was granted by the King’s College London Research Ethics Committee ( reference: LRS-19/20-18687) . Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Power We calculated achieved power for the analyses ( in households with and without symptoms ) using post-hoc power calculations Sex as a biological variable • Factors associated with non-adherence to self-isolation measures included being male , less worried about COVID-19 , and perceiving a smaller risk of catching COVID-19 . Table 2: Resources
Results from OddPub: We did not find a statement about open data. We also did not find a statement about open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
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.
-
