Precision recruitment for high-risk participants in a COVID-19 research study

  1. Aziz M. Mezlini
  2. Eamon Caddigan
  3. Allison Shapiro
  4. Ernesto Ramirez
  5. Helena M. Kondow-McConaghy
  6. Justin Yang
  7. Kerry DeMarco
  8. Pejman Naraghi-Arani
  9. Luca Foschini

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Studies for developing diagnostics and treatments for infectious diseases usually require observing the onset of infection during the study period. However, when the infection base rate incidence is low, the cohort size required to measure an effect becomes large, and recruitment becomes costly and prolonged. We describe an approach for reducing recruiting time and resources in a COVID-19 study by targeting recruitment to high-risk individuals. Our approach is based on direct and longitudinal connection with research participants and computes individual risk scores from individually permissioned data about socioeconomic and behavioural data, in combination with predicted local prevalence data. When we used these scores to recruit a balanced cohort of participants for a COVID-19 detection study, we obtained a 4–7-fold greater COVID-19 infection incidence compared with similar real-world study cohorts.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.03.03.22271504: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    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: 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 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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.03.03.22271504 on medRxiv