Variation in COVID-19 Resource Allocation Protocols and Potential Implementation in the Chicago Metropolitan Area

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.14.21249845: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Institutional review board (IRB) exemption was granted by Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago IRB.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Surveys were sent by email during August and September 2020 using REDCap hosted by Northwestern University.
    REDCap
    suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)

    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:
    Limitations of the study include a low response rate for Survey 1, which may be related hospitals lacking ventilator allocation policies or reluctance from some hospitals to share information about their protocols for research analysis. Another limitation is that the survey data may not reflect the current resource allocation protocols as many hospitals are continually updating them as issues of health disparities and difficulties with applying the protocols are raised,24 and as knowledge about COVID-19 and treatments increases. As all hospitals surveyed were in the Chicagoland area, the variability in allocation methods may not be generalizable to other metropolitan areas where increased state guidance was provided to hospitals when allocation policies were developed.9,28 In addition, some hospital protocols may provide triage officers with additional patient data not provided in the descriptions of the hypothetical patients when determining patient priority. Triage officer variation could only be described within two hospitals due to the low number of respondents from other hospitals, which may be related to lack of establishing triage officers at some hospitals. Finally, in many hospitals, a triage officer is unlikely be the sole decision-maker when prioritizing patients. Rather, a triage group or committee may be working together to determine patient priority and therefore, discussion and elaboration of patient data may make their choices more internally consistent.

    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.