Modeling fomite‐mediated SARS‐CoV‐2 exposure through personal protective equipment doffing in a hospital environment

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.20.20197368: (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

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Whilst SARS-CoV-2 RNA has been detected on surfaces, one limitation to a molecular approach is the lack of information regarding infectivity. In a recent study by Zhou et al. (2020), no surface samples demonstrated infectivity. However, it was noted that the concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces were below the current detection limits for culture methodologies (38). While there are known relationships between cycle threshold values and probabilities of detecting viable virus in a sample (48, 49), it is necessary to know what fraction of detected genome copies relate to viral particles for QMRAs. More data are needed to better understand how molecular concentrations, even concentrations below detection limits, relate to infectivity and subsequent infection risk. Limitations: The model in this study only evaluates a surface transmission route while in reality, risks posed to healthcare workers are due combined exposure pathways: air, droplet, person-to-person, and surface transmission. As the model only evaluates surface transmission, these infection risks are likely to be an underestimate of the total risk incurred by healthcare workers over an entire shift. In a study of healthcare workers in a facility in Wuhan, China, 1.1% (110/9684) were COVID-19 positive (50). According to CDC, of 428,295 healthcare personnel for which data were available, 20% (84,035/428,295) were COVID-19 cases (51). However, it is not known how many shifts were associated with these infection rates....

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


    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.