Individual and social determinants of SARS-CoV-2 testing and positivity in Ontario, Canada: a population-wide study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.09.20223792: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethical review: The use of data in this project was authorized under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act, which does not require review by a Research Ethics Board. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage …SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.09.20223792: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethical review: The use of data in this project was authorized under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act, which does not require review by a Research Ethics Board. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.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.
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.09.20223792: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethical review The use of data in this project was authorized under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act, which does not require review by a Research Ethics Board. Results Of 758,691 individuals tested during the study period, 25,030 (3.3%) received a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis (Figure 1). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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 Limitati…
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.09.20223792: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethical review The use of data in this project was authorized under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act, which does not require review by a Research Ethics Board. Results Of 758,691 individuals tested during the study period, 25,030 (3.3%) received a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis (Figure 1). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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:
Limitations Our diagnoses were restricted to laboratory-confirmed cases and to the 88% of diagnoses available via OLIS, and thus could miss probable cases as well as the remaining laboratory-confirmed cases that may have different determinants of infection. Results are also conditioned on the assumption that determinants remained constant across the study period, whereas surveillance data suggest shifts in how infections propagate between social networks.76 Future analyses include examining changes in the direction and magnitude of determinants over the course of the outbreak. Although we generated directed acyclic graphs for the general categories of determinants to help conceptualize and mitigate selection bias while also identifying plausible determinants, it is possible that we over-adjusted when interpreting individual variables within each category.77 Our models also adjusted for public health region, within which many social determinants cluster51, and thus we cannot infer from the results presented how social determinants of COVID-19 risk may vary between and within these geographic regions. Social determinants were measured at the area level and were not available at the individual level; however, by describing individuals’ neighbourhoods, analyses reflect the role of structural and environmental determinants for individuals living amongst them. Some important determinants identified in the prior literature, such as obesity,8,78 were not available for our study.79 Ot...
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.
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.
-