Commercial airline protocol during COVID-19 pandemic: An experience of Thai Airways International

  1. Krit Pongpirul
  2. Kanitha Kaewpoungngam
  3. Korn Chotirosniramit
  4. Sinnop Theprugsa

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0237299
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.15.20132183: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Ethics Committee Approval: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Dhurakij Pundit University. Patient and Public Involvement: The inception of this study was from the discussion with the pilots and cabin crews of the Thai Airways International.
    RandomizationWe conducted an online questionnaire survey of passengers and in-depth interview with aircrews of two randomly selected repatriation flights operated by Thai Airways International: TG476 (Sydney-Bangkok; 209 passengers (female 61.24%; adult 92.82%), 3 pilots, and 14 cabin attendants) on April 26 and TG492 (Auckland-Bangkok; 168 passengers (female 51.79%; adult 51.19%), 4 pilots, and 14 cabin attendants) on April 27, 2020.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableWe conducted an online questionnaire survey of passengers and in-depth interview with aircrews of two randomly selected repatriation flights operated by Thai Airways International: TG476 (Sydney-Bangkok; 209 passengers (female 61.24%; adult 92.82%), 3 pilots, and 14 cabin attendants) on April 26 and TG492 (Auckland-Bangkok; 168 passengers (female 51.79%; adult 51.19%), 4 pilots, and 14 cabin attendants) on April 27, 2020.

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study has some limitations. First, the response rates of this voluntary questionnaire survey were low; however, the responses were from an unbiased seat selection and could be representative of the flights. Second, the self-reported data relied on passengers’ perception and might not be accurate to be used as a reference for real practice. Third, the nature of Thai passengers might not be exactly like that of other ethnic origins.

    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 10.1101/2020.06.15.20132183v1 on medRxiv