1. Matthew Seeger

    Review 2: "Development of a Codebook of Online Anti-Vaccination Rhetoric to Manage COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation"

    Reviewers find this a well-executed effort to characterize the nature of vaccine hesitancy in online forums, while also noting that vaccine hesitancy arises through other channels, and that the study might be enriched by engaging other theoretical and empirical literature.

    Read the original source
    Was this evaluation helpful?
  2. Toby Bolsen

    Review 1: "Development of a Codebook of Online Anti-Vaccination Rhetoric to Manage COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation"

    Reviewers find this a well-executed effort to characterize the nature of vaccine hesitancy in online forums, while also noting that vaccine hesitancy arises through other channels, and that the study might be enriched by engaging other theoretical and empirical literature.

    Read the original source
    Was this evaluation helpful?
  3. Strength of evidence

    Reviewers: Toby Bolsen (Georgia State University) | πŸ“—πŸ“—πŸ“—πŸ“—β—»οΈ
    Matthew Seeger (Wayne State University) | πŸ“—πŸ“—πŸ“—πŸ“—β—»οΈ

    Read the original source
    Was this evaluation helpful?
  4. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.23.21253727: (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.

    Read the original source
    Was this evaluation helpful?