Risk of COVID-19-related death among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma prescribed inhaled corticosteroids: an observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.19.20135491: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Software and Reproducibility: Data management was performed using Python 3.8 and SQL, with analysis carried out using Stata 16.1. Pythonsuggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)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 weaknesses: The greatest …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.19.20135491: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Software and Reproducibility: Data management was performed using Python 3.8 and SQL, with analysis carried out using Stata 16.1. Pythonsuggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)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 weaknesses: The greatest strength of this study was the power we had to look at multiple drug treatments as our dataset included medical records from almost 24 million individuals. Our study is further strengthened by the use of two different study populations and active comparators, as well as sensitivity analyses to quantify the potential impact of unmeasured confounding on results. Another strength is our use of open methods: we pre-specified our analysis plan and have shared all analytical code. We also recognise possible limitations. The primary limitation is the risk of confounding by indication due to unmeasured or imperfectly defined potential confounding variables. Decisions regarding treatment choices involve factors that may not be well recorded in electronic health records including measures such as spirometry, and likely steroid responsiveness. As we did not have secondary care data our assessment of exacerbation history was incomplete, limiting our ability to adjust for this. Our sensitivity analyses confirm that unmeasured confounding is a plausible reason for the harmful associations we observed. The proportional hazards assumption was not met for the COPD models, with KM plots indicating that the hazard ratio for this exposure increased over time. This is perhaps not surprising, as the risk of acquiring COVID-19 was lower in the early stages of the pandemic. The HR for the COPD population should be interpreted as an average over the entire follo...
Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:
Identifier Status Title NCT04331054 Recruiting Protective Role of Inhaled Steroids for Covid-19 Infection NCT04330586 Recruiting A Trial of Ciclesonide in Adults With Mild-to-moderate COVID… 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 10.1101/2020.06.19.20135491: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethical approval This study was approved by the Health Research Authority ( REC reference 20/LO/0651 ) and by the LSHTM Ethics Board ( ref 21863) . Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Software and Reproducibility Data management was performed using Python 3.8 and SQL , with analysis carried out using Stata 16.1 . Pythonsuggested: (IPython, SCR_001658)Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.19.20135491: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethical approval This study was approved by the Health Research Authority ( REC reference 20/LO/0651 ) and by the LSHTM Ethics Board ( ref 21863) . Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Software and Reproducibility Data management was performed using Python 3.8 and SQL , with analysis carried out using Stata 16.1 . Pythonsuggested: (IPython, SCR_001658)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 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.
-
