Laboratory study of physical barrier efficiency for worker protection against SARS-CoV-2 while standing or sitting
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.26.21261146: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources All statistical tests were two-sided at the 0.05 significance level and analyses were conducted in SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). SAS Institutesuggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)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:There are some limitations in this experiment. First, all experiments were performed in an isolation room that …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.26.21261146: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources All statistical tests were two-sided at the 0.05 significance level and analyses were conducted in SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). SAS Institutesuggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)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:There are some limitations in this experiment. First, all experiments were performed in an isolation room that provided consistent ventilation rates for comparison which may not be representative of occupational settings. Further studies with other general air movement patterns are needed. There is a wide variation in workstation configurations. The scenarios used here do not accurately reflect all real-world situations and a larger access opening is likely necessary at salons for performing manicures. The experiments did not consider worker or customer movement and only measured a potential exposure from two direct linear coughs. The OPCs collected data at 6-second intervals, so a travel time associated with the aerosolized particles could not be calculated. The cough simulator did not produce many particles in the larger size ranges. We collected data for 10 minutes after each cough. Since smaller particles remain in the air for longer, the two ACH we used aided in removing the small particles and prevented them from migrating and settling. Finally, masks or other transmission control methods were not considered in this work. Barriers were solely considered to assess this engineering control. Other control methods used in combination with barriers would likely provide additional reductions in exposure. In summary, laboratory simulations demonstrate that barriers can reduce cough particle exposures in locations where workers interact with others and especially for situations...
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.
-
