The benefits of peer transparency in safe workplace operation post pandemic lockdown

  1. Arkady Wey
  2. Alan Champneys
  3. Rosemary J. Dyson
  4. Nisreen A. Alwan
  5. Mary Barker

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The benefits, both in terms of productivity and public health, are investigated for different levels of engagement with the test, trace and isolate procedures in the context of a pandemic in which there is little or no herd immunity. Simple mathematical modelling is used in the context of a single, relatively closed workplace such as a factory or back-office where, in normal operation, each worker has lengthy interactions with a fixed set of colleagues.

A discrete-time SEIR model on a fixed interaction graph is simulated with parameters that are motivated by the recent COVID-19 pandemic in the UK during a post-peak phase, including a small risk of viral infection from outside the working environment. Two kinds of worker are assumed, transparents who regularly test, share their results with colleagues and isolate as soon as a contact tests positive for the disease, and opaques who do none of these. Moreover, the simulations are constructed as a “playable model” in which the transparency level, disease parameters and mean interaction degree can be varied by the user. The model is analysed in the continuum limit.

All simulations point to the double benefit of transparency in maximising productivity and minimising overall infection rates. Based on these findings, public policy implications are discussed on how to incentivise this mutually beneficial behaviour in different kinds of workplace, and simple recommendations are made.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.06.20147678: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.06.20147678v1 on medRxiv