New York City COVID-19 resident physician exposure during exponential phase of pandemic

  1. Mark P. Breazzano
  2. Junchao Shen
  3. Aliaa H. Abdelhakim
  4. Lora R. Dagi Glass
  5. Jason D. Horowitz
  6. Sharon X. Xie
  7. C. Gustavo de Moraes
  8. Alice Chen-Plotkin
  9. Royce W.S. Chen

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1172/jci139587
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.23.20074310: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: The need for subject consent was waived due to minimal risk, anonymous nature, and lack of sensitive information in the study design as per Columbia University Institutional Review Board expedited exemption protocol IRB-AAAS9946.
    IRB: The need for subject consent was waived due to minimal risk, anonymous nature, and lack of sensitive information in the study design as per Columbia University Institutional Review Board expedited exemption protocol IRB-AAAS9946.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    All queried programs but one were centralized within 30 miles of Central Park in Manhattan, verified by Google Maps with hyperlink: https://www.google.com/maps (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) for distance calculations which used mailing addresses from primary affiliations for each recipient of the survey.
    Google Maps
    suggested: None

    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:
    We recognize limitations to our current study. While not all presumed and suspected cases have COVID-19, we present these numbers given the high pre-test probability of infection in HCW with suggestive symptoms, as well as known limitations of RT-PCR detection of the virus.15,16 Future work using serological testing may provide a more accurate census of confirmed positives, as recent studies have shown.18 Selection bias may have affected our findings, as fields such as ophthalmology may have been over-represented due to the authors’ connections to colleagues in this field, while other specialties may have been under-represented because of significant stress and lack of time to complete the survey. It is also possible that program directors whose residents have been affected by COVID-19 would be more likely to respond. However, we capture 91 NYC residency programs (out of an estimated 340 total residency programs) during a period of exponential pandemic growth, offering a unique perspective on the impact on resident physicians during what may be the height of COVID-19 in NYC. Indeed, capturing the experience as it happens avoids recall bias after the fact. It is our hope that this insight may allow locations not yet as substantially affected by COVID-19 to better anticipate the needs of resident physicians, who are truly at the front lines of an unprecedented challenge. New York City Residency Program Directors COVID-19 Research Group: Azin Abazari, MD6, Douglas R. Frederick, ...

    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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.23.20074310v1 on medRxiv