Association Between Sampling Method and Covid-19 Test Positivity Among Undergraduate Students: Testing Friendship Paradox in Covid-19 Network of Transmission

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

In November 2020, we conducted a cross sectional study to implement and test the method of acquaintance sampling (randomly sampling friends of randomly sampled individuals) in detecting students with higher probability of COVID-19 positivity. Overall, 879 students were randomly sampled and participated in this study. In an online survey, the randomly sampled participants nominated a friend, and reported their own and their nominated friend's COVID-19 status. Nominated friends were about 1.64 (95% CI: 1.33, 2.00) times more likely to have ever been infected with COVID-19, compared to randomly sampled students. Our study corroborates the effectiveness of acquaintance sampling for identifying members of networks with higher COVID-19 risk. These findings could be useful for university policy makers when developing mitigation testing programs and intervention strategies against COVID-19 spread.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.14.20248144: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    RandomizationFrom September to November 2020, we conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test whether receiving serological COVID-19 test results influenced COVID-19 protective behaviors.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The endline survey was an online survey on REDCap and included questions about student’s previous positive testing history (if the student has ever been tested positive for COVID-19).
    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:
    The primary limitation of the current study is that we could not contact the nominated friends to collect data about their actual COVID-19 testing history because this was an opportunistic study that leveraged a larger RCT. Participants might had imperfect and out of date information about their friends’ COVID-19 status. This particularly could have caused underestimation of the true COVID-19 prevalence among the nominated friends. Moreover, because students were participating in a study about COVID-19, it might have primed them to recall their friends who had been tested positive in the past. This selection bias might have caused an overestimation of the true prevalence of COVID-19 positivity among nominated friends. Despite these limitations, our study bolsters the strength of the acquaintance sampling method in detecting those who are more likely to contract the disease early. These findings could be useful for university policy makers when developing mitigation testing programs and intervention strategies against COVID-19 spread. We suggest future studies assess the feasibility of this sampling method in mitigation/surveillance testing and immunization strategies at university level.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:

    IdentifierStatusTitle
    NCT04620798Active, not recruitingLongitudinal COVID-19 Antibody Testing in Indiana University…


    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.