Primary Care Practitioners’ Response to 2019 Novel Coronavirus Outbreak in China

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

The emerging outbreak of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originated from Wuhan poses a great challenge to healthcare system in China. 1 Primary care practitioners (PCPs) have an important role in district communicable disease control. 2 However, because primary health-care system in China still needs to be substantially strengthened, 3,4 whether PCPs are proactive and capable in responding to the outbreak remains unclear. Using an electronic questionnaire, we surveyed a national sample of PCPs to assess their response to novel coronavirus outbreak.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.11.20022095: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Once completed and returned, the survey was regarded as informed consent by participants.
    IRB: This study was deemed exempt from review by the Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital Ethics Committee.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot 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 includes several limitations. First, there is a diversity of control measures among districts and PCPs’ response may be affected by local authorities. Second, PCPs other than clinicians are not included in our study because they are not responsible for screening and transfer. Policy-makers should take steps to improve PCPs’ capacity and consciousness to ready for rapid response, and strengthen collaboration between PCPs and specialists in hospitals.

    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.