Healthcare workers’ SARS-CoV-2 infection rates during the second wave of the pandemic: follow-up study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.17.21266459: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis 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:Strengths and limitations: Major strengths are the prospective cohort design with day-by-day information that allowed precise account for incubation period and day-by-day change in exposure, the complete follow-up for PCR test results, and information on …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.17.21266459: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis 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:Strengths and limitations: Major strengths are the prospective cohort design with day-by-day information that allowed precise account for incubation period and day-by-day change in exposure, the complete follow-up for PCR test results, and information on incident loss of taste and smell that is a signature of SARS-CoV-2 infection.14,16 Other strengths are the free access to PCR testing that required no symptoms and the high testing rate of 7.1% per day. The decision to be PCR tested was therefore unlikely to be strongly associated with COVID-19 contact and result of the PCR test, and we regard collider bias a minor problem.17 Participants were tested 29% more often, participated more often December to February, when population infection rate was high, and showed an 8% higher infection rate than the invited population. Otherwise, participants were comparable with the invited target population and this neither suggest strong collider bias.17 Participants with one COVID-19 contact form more often experienced the other COVID-19 contact forms and the mutually adjusted IRR estimates were substantially reduced and are expected to provide the best estimates of the separate effects. Participants with close contact with co-workers and persons outside work with COVID-19 had been PCR tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection more often than those with no such contact, but this should not have biased the current findings. COVID-19 contact information was partly obtained after the results of the PCR...
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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-