1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.19.21260721: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: A structured questionnaire was prepared in a Google Form and a link was generated, shared with all authors and other volunteers who were instructed properly as to how well they can use this form to recruit data with adequate consent from the participants.
    IRB: Ethical considerations: This study was conducted in accordance with the institutional Research Ethics and the declaration of Helsinki.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    Data Management and Analysis: All submitted data were automatically stored in a dynamic Microsoft excel sheet which was made available offline after completion of data collection for primary data processing including data duplication-checking, data cleaning, data coding, etc.
    Microsoft excel
    suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)
    After accomplishment of data cleaning and coding, the final dataset having data of 402 respondents was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) version 26.0 for further data processing and doing all statistical analysis which included descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal Wallis H test, Multiple logistic regression, Spearman rank-order correlation.
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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:
    Limitations, Strength, and Recommendation: Our study had several limitations. First, our study sample could not reflect all populations throughout the country. Second, our study could not include participants of all ages. Third, the study sample size was comparatively small. Fourth, our study followed a web-based cross-sectional study that excluded underprivileged people especially those who were not accessible to internet-based facilities. Five, we had to conduct comparatively less sensitive statistical analysis as our data were not normally distributed. As to the strength of our study, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that attempted to find out possible reasons why people are deflected from maintaining preventive measures. Future investigations should follow both community-based and web-based cross-sectional studies, collecting data from all sectors, all divisions, attempting to find out the most probable reasons behind failure to maintain all preventive measures for covid-19 prevention in a more structured way.

    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.

    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?