1. Yi Li

    Review 2: "Disparities in COVID-19 Fatalities among Working Californians"

    While reviewers note potential underreporting and demographic ambiguities, they agree that the preprint does outline such limitations and ultimately sheds light on important health disparities.

    Read the original source
    Was this evaluation helpful?
  2. Review 1: "Disparities in COVID-19 Fatalities among Working Californians"

    While reviewers note potential underreporting and demographic ambiguities, they agree that the preprint does outline such limitations and ultimately sheds light on important health disparities.

    Read the original source
    Was this evaluation helpful?
  3. Was this evaluation helpful?
  4. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.10.21266195: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Ethical Considerations: The California Health and Human Services Agency’s Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects exempted the study from institutional review board review.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS software V.9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, North Carolina, USA) and R Studio Version 4.0.2
    SAS
    suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)
    SAS Institute
    suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)

    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:
    This study has several limitations. Our definition of COVID-19 fatality required a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test result for SARS-CoV-2. Thus, COVID-19 decedents in California who did not undergo PCR testing were excluded, potentially underestimating the occupational burden of COVID-19 deaths. The working status of some decedents may have been misclassified, such as unemployed decedents classified as likely working. Our use of “usual occupation” listed on the death certificate may have misclassified the occupation of some decedents who were working in a different occupation at the time of infection. In addition, we used ACS data from 2019, as 2020 data were not yet available. Pandemic-related changes in employment that occurred in California in 2020 may mean that denominators were overestimated (47). As a result, we may have underestimated the COVID-19 mortality rates for some occupations. Finally, by focusing on working-age decedents, we did not address the potential burden of COVID-19 on workers 65 years of age and older. Our findings have implications for prevention. Given the likelihood that COVID-19 fatalities among working Californians included work-related cases, the occupations with elevated mortality rates should be prioritized by public health and regulatory authorities to ensure that non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as physical distancing, use of respiratory protection or face coverings, and adequate ventilation, are implemented in the workplac...

    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.

    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?