Physical activity and COVID-19: an observational and Mendelian randomisation study

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 10.1101/2020.08.01.20166405: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: The detailed description of genotyping, quality control and genetic imputation have been described previously.18 From a total of 488,366 participants in the UKBB with genotype data, 149,110 samples were excluded due to consent withdrawals, non-white British ethnic background, sex mismatch, sex aneuploidy, high missing rate/outlier, and kinship inference.
    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:
    Our study has several limitations. Firstly, participants of the UKBB tend to be healthier, leaner, and smoke less compared to the general population of the UK, especially for those who accepted the invitation to take part in the accelerometer aspect of the study. Furthermore, UKBB participants were recruited when aged 40 to 69 years old, and so may now have an even higher risk of severe COVID-19 disease. The lower obese/overweight and smoking rate and older age may result in an underestimation of the effects of obesity and smoking status. Secondly, the data for AMPA were obtained between 2013 and 2015, and older age related to a lower AMPA, which could lead to an underestimation of the true effect of AMPA on COVID-19.12 The data for MVPA and BMI were acquired even earlier (2006-2010), so, the historical measures may not be a good proxy for current values. Combining the discrepancy between objectively and subjectively measured PA and the time gap may explain the different results of MVPA and AMPA on COVID-19 related outcomes. Thirdly, our study did not support the enhanced effect of BMI on COVID-19, even not for the COVID-19 death outcome.15 This may be due to the relatively leaner UKBB population, and the time gap between BMI and COVID-19 testing. Finally, testing practices and capacity changed over time in the UK, so the earlier data (data prior to 30/05/2020 represent a limited subset of COVID-19 infections. Due to the limited number of test results, the MR analysis had low...

    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.