Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2022.01.14.22269289: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Samples obtained from non-health worker individuals were approved by Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Chile (Protocol ID 2123-FCS-UCH and consent approval).
    Sex as a biological variableIn total, 316 individuals participated, of which 57.4% were women, and 42.6% were men.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot 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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    One limitation of our study is that we assessed antibody production against the spike protein of SARS-CoV2 but a relevant response mediating long-lasting immunity could also be carried out by T cells, which are not analyzed in this work. However, a recent study with 15 volunteers with no suspected history of COVID-19, vaccinated with two doses of CoronaVac showed humoral and cellular immune response 28d after the second dose (14). As such, it is possible that a heterologous booster scheme based on CoronaVac as the basal vaccine could lead to potent immunity, based on the diversity of viral antigens provided by an inactivated virus formulation, followed by a booster with mRNA or adenoviral vector vaccines, which trigger a superior degree of immunogenicity. The long-term immunological effects related to protection against SARS-CoV-2’ variants of concerns and variants of interests induced by heterologous booster strategies should be determined with high priority in order to shed light on the future management of the pandemic across the globe.

    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?