Testing & Opening in Augustusburg A Success Story?
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The city of Augustusburg allowed for opening of, inter alia, restaurants and hotels joint with large-scale testing. We evaluate this testing & opening (T&O) experiment by comparing the evolution of case rates in Augustusburg with the evolution in other communities of Saxony. We have access to small-scale SARS-CoV-2 infection data at the community level (” Gemeinde”) instead of the county level (” Landkreis”) usually used for disease surveillance. Despite data challenges, we conclude that T&O did not lead to any increase in case rates in Augustusburg compared to its control county. When we measure the effect of T&O on cumulative cases, we find a small increase in Augustusburg. This difference almost completely disappears when we control for the effect of higher case rates due to more testing. Generally speaking, T&O worked much better than in comparable projects elsewhere.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.16.21258869: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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:…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.16.21258869: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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.
- Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-