Time-varying Reproduction Numbers of COVID-19 in Georgia, USA, March 2, 2020 to November 20, 2020

  1. Kamalich Muniz-Rodriguez
  2. Gerardo Chowell
  3. Jessica S Schwind
  4. Randall Ford
  5. Sylvia K Ofori
  6. Chigozie A Ogwara
  7. Margaret R Davies
  8. Terrence Jacobs
  9. Chi-Hin Cheung
  10. Logan T Cowan
  11. Andrew R Hansen
  12. Isaac Chun-Hai Fung

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 10.7812/tpp/20.232
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.19.20107219v3 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.19.20107219v2 on medRxiv
  4. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.19.20107219: (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: Our study is limited by several factors. First, we used the NYT dataset; data was recorded by reported date and not by day of symptom onset. Given the time difference between the transmission events and subsequent symptom onset, testing, and case reporting, the Rt estimates should reflect transmission that had happened several days ago (the sum of the incubation period and the delay to testing and case reporting). Second, our data does not differentiate between imported and community transmission cases. Third, cases may be underreported due to limited testing capacity, or they may be mild or asymptomatic cases. Fourth, our analysis is right-censored by June 14, 2020. Future studies can further extend the analysis as the pandemic progresses. Fifth, in addition to the two methods utilized here, there are other statistical methods that estimate Rt (Gostic et al. 2020; O’Driscoll et al. 2020), e.g., the case reproduction number method as proposed by Walling and Teunis (2004) but they are out-of-scope for this paper.

    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.

  5. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.19.20107219v1 on medRxiv