Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2022.01.21.22269423: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Prior to the start of the study, written consent was obtained from all patients and controls.
    IRB: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Goethe University Frankfurt (number 20-1001) and registered under the number ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04739020.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Spirometry: Spirometry was performed according to the recommendations of the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS)36 by a hand-held device (Asthma Monitor® AM; VIASYS Healthcare GmbH, Höchberg, Germany).
    VIASYS Healthcare
    suggested: None
    Statistical analysis: GraphPad Prism 5.01 (GraphPad Software, Inc.) and R 4.0.4 were used for statistical analysis.
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    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:
    Our study has several limitations, including that the SARS-CoV-2 PCR and aerosol particle measurements were not performed simultaneously. A timeframe from PCR test to aerosol measurement of 72 hours was accepted for all patients; this may affect the results, as other studies have found peak viral loads around day four of infection, which might be present 1-3 days before the onset of symptoms and followed by a steady decline in viral load.36 In addition, only hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were included. And it seems reasonable that aerosol particle counts may be greater in patients with severe disease, reflecting a certain level of lung framework damage due to this viral infection. This might explain the lower exhaled particle counts reported in the immunocompromised sub-group, when compared with the pneumonia and respiratory failure groups. Further studies should assess whether similar quantities of aerosol particles are produced by asymptomatic individuals and patients with mild infection. The utility of this approach as a diagnostic tool for patients at earlier stages of infection, a critical time for diagnosis, is not addressed by this work and will be the focus of further research. Moreover, the duration of elevated particle counts is unclear in SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients. This may only be verified by longitudinal measurements of aerosol particles and serial SARS-CoV-2 PCR measurements. In addition, this study allows no statement concerning differences i...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:

    IdentifierStatusTitle
    NCT04739020RecruitingRespiratory Aerosols in Patients With COVID-19 and Healthy C…


    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?