Prevalence of molecular and serological tests of the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Carlos Chagas laboratory – Sabin group in Cuiabá

  1. Cristiane Coimbra de Paula
  2. Walkiria Shimoya-Bittencourt
  3. João Pedro Castoldo Passos
  4. Caroline Aquino Vieira De Lamare Paula
  5. Karuppusamy Arunachalam
  6. Cor Jesus Fernandes Fontes
  7. Ruberlei Godinho de Oliveira

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 10.1590/1806-9282.20210769
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.26.20219683: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of UNIVAG-Centro Universitário under protocol number CAAE: 37320320.1.0000.5692.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    In order to verify the prevalence of molecular and serological tests for SARS-CoV-2, all samples from people seen in the laboratory of both sexes were included, without age restriction; and the reports of the molecular tests performed by qPCR-RT through the extraction of the genetic material of the nasal swab virus, as well as serological tests SOROVID-19 (IgM and IgG) for the detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Rapid IgG or IgM test data were excluded from the study.
    SARS-CoV-2. Rapid IgG
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data were expressed as absolute frequency and percentages with tabulation in Microsoft Excel.
    Microsoft Excel
    suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)

    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:
    Among the limitations, despite the secondary data of this study being collected in a locally and nationally known laboratory, the samples are representative and descriptive only from the city of Cuiabá and region roundabout. This in fact precludes a statewide coverage of the epidemiology of COVID-19, as well as the possibility that the population may have performed tests for SARS-CoV-2 in other laboratories available in the capital. However, it is one of the first studies describing the cases of COVID-19 and the type of approach carried out in Cuiabá which directly contributes to decision-making by requiring notification to the surveillance and health control bodies.

    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.

    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 10.1101/2020.10.26.20219683 on medRxiv