SARS-CoV-2 serological findings and exposure risk among employees in school and retail after first and second wave COVID-19 pandemic in Oslo, Norway: a cohort study

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.27.21256214: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: 2020 by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in South-Eastern Norway (Reference number 134064).
    Sex as a biological variableEligibility criteria, ethical considerations, and follow-up: Eligible participants were workers either male or female, age > 18 years.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power AnalysisEstimates showed that n=90 was needed in each group to detect a 10% deviation from p0 with a power of 80% and Type-I error rate of 5%.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    This is partly supported by a serological study in the Oslo area with 9500 participants randomly selected from two ongoing research studies (Norflu and MoBa), which shows that 1.4% of the participants had developed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 (NIPH 2020d).
    SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical tests were used as indicated with Graphpad 9 (Binomial Test, Fisher’s exact test or Mann-Whitney test).
    Graphpad
    suggested: (GraphPad, RRID:SCR_000306)

    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:
    However, low infection rates combined with the modest number of participants recruited in our study imposes limitations on the conclusions we can draw. The power estimates for the retrospective and prospective analyses to uncover the rate of undiagnosed cases in school and retail workers were based on scenarios made in April 2020 when this study was designed. Initially, we feared that the general population would face higher rates of disease transmission. In particular, we anticipated many infected workers in retail, as these individuals had exposure to potential transmission from customers and colleagues. Diagnostic testing capacity was insufficient at this stage, during the first wave, and many parameters were unknown. However, in contrast to the scenarios encountered in many other cities across the world, COVID-19 infection rates stayed relatively low in Oslo. As the approach of this study was to visit workplaces to collect data on occupational health, authorization and organization at the workplaces was required. We achieved a feasible mode of data collection through recruiting participants in groups from a limited number of workplaces, 10 schools and 15 retail stores. These were an arbitrary selection of representative workplaces in Oslo, not a random sample of individuals drawn from the entire workers’ population, and thus might be affecting the study’s external validity. Sampling can affect results, as outbreaks of COVID-19 show clustering. On the other hand, with just...

    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.