Performance of at-home self-collected saliva and nasal-oropharyngeal swabs in the surveillance of COVID-19

  1. Paulo H. Braz-Silva
  2. Ana C. Mamana
  3. Camila M. Romano
  4. Alvina C. Felix
  5. Anderson V. de Paula
  6. Noeli E Fereira
  7. Lewis F. Buss
  8. Tania R. Tozetto-Mendoza
  9. Rafael A. V. Caixeta
  10. Fabio E. Leal
  11. Regina M. Z. Grespan
  12. João C. S. Bizário
  13. Andrea B. C. Ferraz
  14. Dipak Sapkota
  15. Simone Giannecchini
  16. Kelvin K. To
  17. Alain Doglio
  18. Maria C. Mendes-Correa

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1080/20002297.2020.1858002
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.23.20218487: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: This study was conducted according to ethical standards defined by institutional and national research ethics committees and the Helsinki Declaration of 1964, including subsequent amendments or comparable ethical standards, and approved by the Clinics Hospital Research Ethics Committee of the University of São Paulo School of Medicine under protocol number 3.979.632.
    Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all the individuals enrolled in this study.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableAll pregnant women and patients meeting pre-defined screening criteria for severe disease were advised to attend a hospital service.

    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:
    As the main limitation of this study, we can cite the non-inclusion of asymptomatic individuals in the platform of COVID-19 surveillance. In conclusion, our data show the possibility of using at-home self-collected samples (especially saliva), as an adequate alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This new approach of testing can be useful to develop strategies for COVID-19 surveillance and for guiding public health decisions.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.10.23.20218487v1 on medRxiv