Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.04.22274659: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    5.2 Search strategy: Below is an example of a search strategy for the Medline database.
    suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)

    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:
    3.9 Limitations of available evidence: Limitations of this rapid review include a lack of high-quality evidence such as RCTs and service evaluation studies that evaluate specific innovations or tailored services to reduce gender inequalities. Only 8 papers in this rapid review were primary studies indicating that more primary research is needed to evaluate specific innovations or tailored interventions to reduce gender inequalities in the UK context. 3.10 Implications for policy and practice: Implications for policy and practice are outlined below for each of the six EHRC domains: 3.10.1 Work: 3.10.2 Health: 3.10.3 Living Standards: 3.10.4 Personal Security: 3.10.5 Participation: 3.10.6 Education: 3.10.7 Further research: Innovations implemented in the domains of personal security, participation and education require robust evaluation. Further research is required to understand the effectiveness of gender equality innovations for minority groups. 3.11 Strengths and limitations: 3.11.1 Strengths: This rapid review focused on the peer-reviewed papers (n=21) in alignment with the six domains identified by EHRC. The 21 peer-reviewed papers were a mixture of reviews, commentaries, and primary studies. Grey literature (n=14) is included in Appendix 2. The rapid review investigated innovations/interventions to reduce gender inequality during the first three waves of the COVID-19 pandemic between March 2020 and December 2021. Data was not presented according to ‘waves’, but data coll...

    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?