Protection against Omicron from Vaccination and Previous Infection in a Prison System
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.26.22275639: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Study oversight: The study was approved by the institutional review board at Stanford University (protocol #55835). Sex as a biological variable Staff were matched on prison, position (custody, healthcare), age group (18-39, 40-54, ≥55), and gender (male, female). Randomization not detected. 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:Our study also has several limitations. As …
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.26.22275639: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Study oversight: The study was approved by the institutional review board at Stanford University (protocol #55835). Sex as a biological variable Staff were matched on prison, position (custody, healthcare), age group (18-39, 40-54, ≥55), and gender (male, female). Randomization not detected. 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:Our study also has several limitations. As an observational cohort study, potential for bias due to confounding is an important consideration. While we aimed to limit confounding by matching on a variety of covariates, including those related to vaccine acceptance and risk of prior infections, the potential for confounding from unmeasured covariates remains. Vaccine uptake varied between residents and staff, and there were differences in the timing of uptake between populations. Moreover, there were differences across the two populations in the timing of prior infections. Differences between the two populations in relative infection risks by vaccination and prior infection status may in part reflect complex interactions of vaccine and prior infection timing, as could the order of vaccination and prior infection among those with both vaccine and infection-acquired immunity. Furthermore, CDCR conducted limited viral sequencing or molecular testing historically and during the study period, and thus we cannot disentangle the effects of variants from temporal waning, nor confirm that all cases observed during the study period were Omicron infections. One potential violation of the assumptions in the test-negative design that testing was not compulsory for all staff during the entire study period. Estimates derived from staff who were boosted or vaccinated with two doses but ineligible for boosters may be biased downward since those staff were no longer required to undergo routine ...
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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
