Cost-effectiveness and return on investment of protecting health workers in low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.22.20137257: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.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:Our PPE demand forecasts, costs, infection and mortality estimates are driven by projections from ICL and the EFST, whose methods and limitations have been previously described [15,17]. Given the speed of this pandemic, further limitations exist in the availability of data examining the effect of PPE on HCW infection rates, as well as …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.22.20137257: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.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:Our PPE demand forecasts, costs, infection and mortality estimates are driven by projections from ICL and the EFST, whose methods and limitations have been previously described [15,17]. Given the speed of this pandemic, further limitations exist in the availability of data examining the effect of PPE on HCW infection rates, as well as the true percentage of total cases that are HCWs. To inform our model we relied on a collection of sources that include rigorous scientific studies, data published by government entities, and media reports that cite government sources. Overall, data are consistent in showing low to zero HCW infection rates in highly controlled settings with strict PPE compliance while public health figures that incorporate a range of healthcare settings with varied PPE compliance demonstrate rates as high, or above 20%. Examples of the percentage of cases that are HCWs from a variety of settings include: 0-1% in high PPE compliance scenarios in Hong Kong, China and the Netherlands [20-22]; 19.9% in the United States [23]; 12.2% in Italy [24]; 3% in South Africa [25]; 7.5% in Nigeria [26]; 13% in Egypt [27]; and 18% in the Philippines [28]. In another Chinese example, initial studies estimated that up to 41% of cases were acquired in the healthcare setting; however, later reports after enforcement of stringent PPE guidelines show HCW infections comprised 3.8% of the total cases [29]. One organization estimates that globally, HCWs make up 7% of all cases [30]. In ...
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.
-
