Effect of SARS-CoV-2 antibody screening on participants' attitudes and behaviour: a study of industry workers in Split, Croatia

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 10.1101/2020.06.15.20131482: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Questionnaire: The questionnaire had six parts: (1) information of the study and informed consent; (2) general demographic data and test results; (3) participants’ general attitudes towards COVID-19; (4) participants’ protective behaviour and fear from the disease prior to testing; (5) participants’ protective behaviour and fear from the disease after the testing; and (6) the factors related to compliance with personal protection measures.
    IRB: The survey was approved by the University Department of Forensic Sciences Ethics Committee on 22 April 2020 (2181-227-05-12-19-0003; 024-04/19-03/00007).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Participants and setting: From May 10 to May 15, 2020, we conducted a survey of DIV Group industry workers in Split-Dalmatia County, Croatia, who were previously tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by rapid immunoassays.
    SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None

    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:
    The limitation of this study is that compared pre- and post-testing self-ratings were all given after the testing, thus potentially introducing a reporting bias. To obtain pre-testing measurements, it was only possible to survey the participants on the day of voluntary serological testing. From the organisational and protective standpoint, it was of utmost importance to minimise the time participants spent at the testing station to the time required for serological testing and completing a mandatory accompanying questionnaire on disease-related factors (Jerković et al., 2020). This would result in not only the prolonged absence of participants from their workplace but also their potentially increased exposure to the virus. Since the period between testing and completing the survey questionnaire lasted a maximum of 21 days for each participant, by testing at a single point in time we relied on the participants’ ability to recall recent behaviours and attitudes. While other studies on the impact of negative screening results repeated measurements after several months or years (Cooper et al., 2017), this was not possible for this study due to the very nature of COVID-19 as well as differing levels of national restrictive measures. The additional limitation of this study was the lack of a control group. The COVID-19 screening in DIV Group in Split (Jerković et al., 2020) resulted in an insufficient number of positive participants to represent a separate group of subjects in resea...

    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.