Temporal Variations in Seroprevalence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infections by Race and Ethnicity in Arkansas

Article activity feed

1. Version published to 10.1093/ofid/ofac154

   Mar 23, 2022
2. 

   ScreenIT

   Jul 21, 2021

   SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.15.21260213: (What is this?)

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

   Table 1: Rigor

   Ethics	IRB: The study was reviewed and approved by the UAMS Institutional Review Board and waiver of consent and HIPAA applied.
   Sex as a biological variable	not detected.
   Randomization	not detected.
   Blinding	not detected.
   Power Analysis	not detected.

   Table 2: Resources

   Antibodies
   Sentences	Resources
   Laboratory Methods: A two-step process was used to evaluate the sera for CoV-2 antibodies, as suggested by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines[13].	CoV-2 suggested: None
   All sera were tested for CoV-2 Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) IgG antibodies using the Beckman Coulter (BC) Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Brea, CA) in the Clinical Laboratory at the UAMS main campus.	CoV-2 Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) IgG suggested: …

   SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.15.21260213: (What is this?)

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

   Table 1: Rigor

   Ethics	IRB: The study was reviewed and approved by the UAMS Institutional Review Board and waiver of consent and HIPAA applied.
   Sex as a biological variable	not detected.
   Randomization	not detected.
   Blinding	not detected.
   Power Analysis	not detected.

   Table 2: Resources

   Antibodies
   Sentences	Resources
   Laboratory Methods: A two-step process was used to evaluate the sera for CoV-2 antibodies, as suggested by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines[13].	CoV-2 suggested: None
   All sera were tested for CoV-2 Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) IgG antibodies using the Beckman Coulter (BC) Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Brea, CA) in the Clinical Laboratory at the UAMS main campus.	CoV-2 Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) IgG suggested: None
   Four-Antigen Confirmation Test (FACT): The laboratory-derived assay in this study was designed considering prior ELISAs for CoV-2 antibodies[14].	antibodies[14 suggested: None
   The plates were washed three times with PBS-T and incubated with 50 µL of secondary antibody solution anti-human IgG + IgM (Jackson ImmunoResearch) diluted 1:5000 in PBS-T + 1% milk) for 1h at RT.	anti-human IgG + IgM suggested: None
   Software and Algorithms
   Sentences	Resources
   All clinical and demographic variables were stored in a protected REDCap database[10, 11] and included patient age, gender, race, ethnicity, ZIP Code, and county of residence.	REDCap suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)
   All analyses were conducted using SAS, version 9.4.	SAS suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)

   ---

   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:

   Benefits and limitations of convenience sampling techniques have been discussed elsewhere[20]. It is possible that our sampling method could favor subjects who were more ill (e.g., individuals who were hospitalized) or more willing to leave their homes (e.g., individuals when were evaluated in clinics), etc. Nonetheless, the seroprevalence observed is consistent with both reported infections and data from American Red Cross blood donations in southern US states[21] and the Centers for Disease Control Multi-State Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence (MASS-C)[22], which increases confidence in our data. The American Red Cross blood study found only 2.9% seroprevalence from August to September in southern states, while the MASS-C data revealed 9.2% seroprevalence in December in Arkansas. It should be noted that these earlier studies had no[17] or low (n=1071 Arkansas samples)[22] representation from Arkansas. Taken together, the data support the conclusion that the while seroprevalence rates demonstrate that more Arkansans have been infected with CoV-2 than previously recognized, the majority of the population in a representative rural southern state was not infected by CoV-2 from March to December of 2020. This, in combination with slow vaccine uptake despite rapid distribution of vaccinations across the State, has left many people vulnerable to CoV-2 infection with variants of concern. In fact, this spring, Arkansas is experiencing an uptick in cases, ranking second in high...

   ---

   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.

   ---

   Read the original source
3. 

   Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.15.21260213v1 on medRxiv

   Jul 19, 2021