“I Walk around Like My Hands are Covered in Mud”: Food Safety and Hand Hygiene Behaviors of Canadians during the COVID-19 Pandemic

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 10.1101/2020.08.25.20181545: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: They were then required to complete this form to ensure they fulfilled eligibility criteria for study inclusion and to provide consent.
    IRB: This study was approved by Ryerson University’s Research Ethics Board (REB #2020-152).
    RandomizationThe names used in the article are pseudonyms that have been randomly assigned to maintain the confidentiality of participants.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot 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:
    There are some limitations to this study. Only four Canadian provinces were represented in this study, and most participants resided in Ontario. Therefore, results may not be representative of all of Canada. Instead, they highlight a range of insights and experiences of Canadians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, most of the participants were under the age of 40, which likely relates to our online recruitment approach. It would be beneficial to examine these behaviours in more older adults to better compare food handling and hand hygiene behaviours across different age groups. Only one age-related difference was identified in this study (produce-washing practices), which requires further investigation. Similarly, though both men and women were represented in most of the focus groups, no notable differences in practices were identified. It might be beneficial to conduct future focus groups stratified by gender to help determine if any considerable gender-related differences in behaviours exist. Finally, it is likely that the online, text-based nature of the focus groups resulted in a shorter duration of each focus group. However, the content amassed in online, text-based focus group discussions has been shown to result in comparable quality of data as in-person focus groups (Kite & Phongsavan, 2017; Namey et al., 2020).

    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.