Failures of quarantine systems for preventing COVID‐19 outbreaks in Australia and New Zealand

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 10.1101/2021.02.17.21251946: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    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:
    Limitations of our analysis include residual uncertainty around the cause of some outbreaks (eg, the Auckland August 2020 outbreak), and imprecision with denominator data on traveler numbers for Australia (eg, some travelers were moved between states on domestic flights which is not captured in the official data we used). Additionally, case numbers are constantly changing, due to the number of reclassifications caused by false positives and duplications. To substantially reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 incursion out of quarantine, the most obvious action is to reduce arrivals, or even suspend arrivals, from high infection locations. Beyond this, there are a range of other potential improvements in ongoing arrangements and processes as detailed in Table 2. In summary, Australia and New Zealand have had 16 COVID-19 identified failures arising from hotel-based quarantine up to 31 January 2021. These systems are now facing higher proportions of infected travelers that threaten the elimination status of these jurisdictions – urgent improvements to quarantine are required.

    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.