COVID‐19 bimodal clinical and pathological phenotypes

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.03.21262841: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: This study was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee and written informed consent was waived.
    Consent: This study was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee and written informed consent was waived.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    RandomizationPositive α-sma cells were evaluated in ten different, randomly selected high-power fields of the lungs.
    BlindingHistological evaluation was performed by specialized pulmonary pathologists (MLB, VLC, ATF) blinded to clinical history.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Immunohistochemistry for anti-alpha smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) (Abcam, ab5694) and anti-SARS-CoV-2 polyclonal antibody, developed by our group for in situ detection of SARS-CoV-2, were performed in paraffin-embedded sections of 3-μm thickness, following our lab protocol10.
    anti-alpha smooth muscle actin (α-SMA)
    suggested: None
    anti-SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical Analysis: Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS v.
    SPSS
    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: 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 found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


    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.

    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.