24,814 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2021
    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265876: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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:
      When interpreting our results, the following limitations should be considered. Firstly, the analyzed sample is affected by a strong selection bias. Indeed, study participants were enrolled among individuals who voluntarily registered to undergo a serological test. In addition, the conducted survey was restricted to the population of the metropolitan city of Milan. Consequently, our sample is not representative of the age distribution and of the household composition of the Italian population and results may not reflect social behavior adopted in less urbanized areas. In particular, crude estimates retrieved from our sample suggest that, in August 2020 (i.e., before introducing the tiered restriction system), the daily mean number of contacts was 74.5% lower than that estimated for Italy by the POLYMOD study in 2008 [18]. Although it is likely that, even in the absence of strong restrictions, current social interactions could strongly differ from those adopted in the pre-pandemic period [25], these numbers should be considered in light of the sampling procedure we adopted for data collection. For this reason, instead of relying on absolute numbers, our analysis focuses on investigating the relative changes in the contact patterns observed across different time periods and at different ages. To minimize potential biases, the potential impact of tier restrictions on the number of reported contacts was assessed by adopting a regression model, where a variety of potential confound...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.02.21265778: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Ethics: All participants provided written informed consent.<br>IRB: The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of California, San Francisco.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Those performing the assays were blinded to clinical information.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Biomarker assays: Plasma biomarker measurements were performed using the fully automated HD-X Simoa platform at two timepoints: early recovery (median 52 days) and late recovery (median 123 days).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Plasma</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We used Stata (version 16.1; StataCorp, College Station, TX) and Prism (version 9.1.2, GraphPad Software, L.L.C., San Diego, CA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Prism</div><div>suggested: (PRISM, RRID:SCR_005375)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 analysis has several important limitations. First, while recruitment was agnostic to the presence of persistent symptoms, the cohort is not representative of the general population with PASC. Second, we relied on self-report to ascertain the presence of symptoms. This risks misattribution of symptoms to neurologic causes and therefore misclassification of individuals as having CNS PASC. In addition, it is difficult to disentangle neurologic symptoms from non-neurologic symptoms which might co-occur and it is possible that differences are driven by more severe PASC in general rather than neurologic symptoms specifically. Affective symptoms may also co-occur and be inter-related. Third, we did not include any objective neurologic measurements, and studies that do include such measurements (which may include detailed neurological history and examination, neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric testing, and/or neuroimaging) are likely to be more informative. Fourth, we measured a limited set of biomarkers. Our measurements were all taken in blood, and while there are established relationships between blood and CSF measurements in other disease conditions,62,63 these have yet to be established for COVID-19.28 For this reason, more detailed studies that include CSF analyses will be critical. Finally, paired pre-pandemic specimens were not available, and it is possible that elevations in these markers among those with CNS PASC preceded SARS-CoV-2 infection. Regardless, we believe th...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04362150</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Long-term Impact of Infection With Novel Coronavirus (COVID-…</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.02.21265668: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265685: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: This study adheres to the STROBE guidelines (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology20), and it has been conducted by a protocol approved by the National Commission for Research Ethics21 (CAAE 30350820.5.1001.0008).<br>Consent: Individual informed consent was waived due to the pandemic and to the fact that all data collected was unidentified, gathered through medical records.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data collection: Data was collected through the analysis of medical records by trained health professionals or undergraduate students (from Medical and Nursing schools) using Research Data Capture (REDCap) tools.22 In the medical records, data collected concerned demographic and clinical characteristics, comorbidities, medication in use prior to admission, COVID-19 symptoms, clinical evaluation at admission, laboratory and radiological exams, medication used during hospitalization and outcomes.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>REDCap</div><div>suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Study limitations include its retrospective design, with data being collected by chart review only, and the fact that thyroid disease status was based on patients information given at hospital admission, so it was not possible to know if the hypothyroidism was compensated or not. Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, the study has the largest sample of COVID-19 patients with hypothyroidism published so far. TSH and thyroid hormone (T4 and T3) levels were not evaluated during the time of hospitalization and time in the ICU, as this is not recommended during hospitalization due to Covid-19 or other acute diseases is by the health organizations, and it was not our aim to access the effects of NTIS. The assessment of thyroid hormone levels throughout the course of Covid-19 is still challenging due to the possibility of overdiagnosis due to abnormal hormone levels during acute systemic disease. It is important to emphasize that these hormonal changes are adaptive processes and cannot be defined as a disease itself.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265478: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Eligibility criteria included maternal age ≥18 years and willing to provide informed consent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study Design: Pregnant women admitted for delivery at eight medical centers in Israel (Hadassah Mount-Scopus, Wolfson, HaEmek, Hillel Yafe, Rabin, Shaare Zedek, Meir, and Sourasky Medical Centers) were approached for enrollment in the Israel Covid-19 in Pregnancy study, starting in April 2020.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IgG and IgM antibody (S1, S2, RBD, N) MFI were log10-transformed for the analyses.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Additionally, when relevant, the effects of wave (either the 2nd or 3rd wave), trimester (1st, 2nd, 3rd), and the wave by trimester interaction on IgG and IgM antibody concentrations or their transfer ratios were analyzed in a General Analysis of Variance Test (ANOVA), followed by Tukey HSD All-Pairwise Comparisons test.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical Analyses: Statistical analyses were performed using Statistix 8 software (Analytical Software, Tallahassee, FL USA) and Prism 5.01 (GraphPad Software; San-Diego, CA, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      The present work possesses several limitations, including bias in sample collection due to daytime recruitment of participants, thereby excluding most emergency cases. The period of sample collection differed among groups, as the Israeli vaccination campaign started after the commencement of the study. Additionally, antibody levels were quantified using antigens of the original virus, and may thus show reduced affinity to antibodies induced by the alpha variant. Pregnancy induces particular changes in a women’s immune system placing them at a vulnerable position when it comes to infections. Therefore, general population immunity dynamics are not always applicable to pregnant women. This is the first study to compare the evolution and dynamics of the maternal-fetal humoral response between Alpha variant and Wildtype SARS-CoV-2 infections, demonstrating that pregnant women response is variant dependent. Additionally, this work enhances the important role of active transport and placental regulation for fetal immunity supporting vaccination during pregnancy.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265819: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The search was done blindly and independently by two researchers (K Rahmani & R Shavale) using the following keywords in the abovementioned databases: COVID-19; SARS-COV-2; coronavirus; vaccine; post-vaccination; mortality; hospitalization; readmission; reinfection; morbidity; and Breakthrough infections.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Search Strategy: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar databases as well as the Preprint servers including medRxiv and Research Square was done to identify the studies related to the keywords studied based on the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) published until October 15, 2021, with full texts in English, without any spacial restrictions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>PubMed</div><div>suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ProQuest</div><div>suggested: (ProQuest, RRID:SCR_006093)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Google Scholar</div><div>suggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MeSH</div><div>suggested: (MeSH, RRID:SCR_004750)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Despite the important results found out on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the incidence of infection, hospitalization, and mortality after vaccination, the present study had a number of limitations, including the possibility of vaccination of specific age or occupational groups (health care worker) associated with an increase or decrease in the chance of contracting SARS-COV2 infection. However, the confounding effect of the background variables was somewhat controlled through the use of HR adjusted studies. Herd immunity was another issue that could distort the overall results; i.e. with increasing follow-ups, the risk of infection in the community and non-vaccinated people would gradually decrease, and this would overestimate the effectiveness of various COVID-19 vaccines.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265877: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      As with any study, the REACT-1 study has limitations. We cannot meaningfully calculate a response rate for round 15 since it is not yet complete, but between rounds 1 (May 2020) and 14 (September 2021) the response rate declined from approximately 30% to approximately 12%. Although we used rim weighting to adjust our prevalence estimates for differential response by age, sex, deprivation, LTLA counts and ethnicity, it remains possible that our estimates are not fully representative of the population as a whole. The data on participants who consented for their REACT-1 data to be linked to their NHS records which include data from the COVID-19 immunisation programme are not yet available for round 15. Surveillance in England indicates that influenza incidence was low up to 26 October 2021 (the most recent data reported by UKHSA [19]), although it will almost certainly increase in coming weeks unless strict social distancing were to be reinstated. For viral infections, co-infections with other bacterial and viral pathogens can increase the risks of complications and mortality. The combined effects of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza co-infections are not well understood [20]. Even if co-infected individuals do not experience increased risks of serious disease, the dual demands on the NHS of caring for COVID-19 and influenza patients is likely to put its resources under pressure. It is therefore essential to monitor ongoing infection risks of both SARS-CoV-2 and influenza so that appropr...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.02.21265826: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Another limitation of this work includes not accounting for under-reporting. Due to the highly contagious nature of SARS-CoV-2, many countries advised individuals with COVID-19-like symptoms to self-isolate at home instead of going to the hospital, except they have a severe case of the disease. As a result, these individuals may not get a test to confirm if they had the disease, and therefore, they may not be captured in the reported cases. This may lead to under-reporting. The availability and consistency of data is also another limitation of this work. Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic has been very tedious worldwide, especially during the early stage of the disease when non-pharmaceutical interventions that impede movement and access to resources were imposed. Particularly, data collection in many developing countries across Africa is challenging due to the lack of adequate infrastructure, leading to inadequate data. The framework presented in this paper requires knowing the transition rates of infected individuals between the different compartments of the model. These parameters may not be immediately available for a novel disease like SARS-CoV-2 during the early stage of the disease. Another limitation of our model includes not explicitly modeling the dynamics of asymptomatic individuals. An interesting extension of the work presented in this paper includes incorporating a parameter for the ascertainment fraction of the reported cases of COVID-19 in each count...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.03.21265861: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: Strength’s worth highlighting, is the tandem use of longitudinal data on individuals aged 18-24 and repeated samples of individuals aged 18 years originating from the same baseline population. Moreover, our data collection during the initial lockdown included up to 7 measurements spanning the reopening phases, as well as one measurement subsequent to a second and more prolonged lockdown. The repeated cross-sections allow us to quantify seasonal variations and is only vulnerable to attrition if the participation in DNBC-18 systematically changed over year of birth or season, as opposed to the longitudinal setup which is more vulnerable to attrition due to loss to follow-up. We attempted to reduce bias from differential attrition by inverse probability weighting. The validity of this method relies on a correctly specified model including all relevant predictors for loss to follow-up, which cannot be assumed. Interpretation of our findings likewise deserves consideration of a few limitations. In the longitudinal setup, the baseline data was collected at age 18 years and three months for all participants, whereas the participants’ ages during lockdown was 18-24 years. Thus, the timespan between the before and during lockdown measurement was greater for the older participants. For older participants, changes in mental health may be underestimated, since the pre-lockdown measurement represent a younger age than the follow-up measures, and on average repor...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265729: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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 several limitations of this research. First, the contact pattern in the matrices was already affected by NPIs and might be not identical to the contact pattern before COVID-19, necessitating the normalization done on the matrices. For example, transmission rate among those age 0-17 might be underestimated because of restricted attendance in schools. Second, vaccine waning is not considered. However, booster shots are administered and vaccine hesitancy remains low in Korea, which mean that the effect of administered vaccines might be maintained [22]. Third, our age-age matrix focused on the Delta variant, and we were not able to examine transmission of other previous variants. The coverage of genomic surveillance among COVID-19 cases in Korea has steadily increased, and it covers about 30% of all confirmed cases. Therefore, the number of cases with genomic results before the occurrence of the Delta variant was small to be analyzed separately by variant types. Our result highlighted the transmission pattern of Delta, which is currently the dominant variant in most countries.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265527: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A prespecified case report form was used, applying Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) tools (15).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>REDCap</div><div>suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This is an intrinsic limitation of regression models, and the variable may be seen as non-significant due to the fact that it is a non-linear association. As previously mentioned, an important limitation of regression models is collinearity. When exploiting LASSO regression in our previous work (4), we had to exclude some features which had shown to be important in the boosting model due to high collinearity. This may explain the difference in the features included in both models, despite the fact that all features included in both had previous evidence of association with COVID-19 prognosis. Another interesting remark is shown in Fig 4, in which we can see the relative importance of each feature. Here, again, age is the most important single feature (due to higher mean SHAP value), which is in line with previous studies (3,31,32). In an American study in intensive care units, age has shown higher discriminatory capacity when used in isolation (AUC 0.66) than the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (0.55) for mortality prediction, in a cohort study of adult patients from 18 ICUs in the US, with COVID-19 pneumonia. This score is widely used at emergency departments and ICUs worldwide to determine the extent of a person’s organ function or rate of failure (42). In the present study, the remaining features, when combined, yield higher predictive value in this task than just age. Reliability: Finally, we investigate issues related to the reliability of the models. Ne...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265660: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Rt estimates were calculated at the district level using the EpiNow2 R package (1.3.2) using MCMC, as implemented in Stan27,28, based on weekly reported cases29.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>EpiNow2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Unlike in Abbott et. al.30 we modelled Rt explicitly with the gaussian process and not as a first order difference.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Google Mobility Indicator: We used mobility data from Google as a second measure of human movement16.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Google</div><div>suggested: (Google, RRID:SCR_017097)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265680: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical considerations: As a public health surveillance activity in response to the COVID-19 emergency response, this activity was deemed exempt from IRB by the GDPH Review Board.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      This evaluation was subject to limitations. First, while Fulton County Board of Health offered testing to individuals of all ages beginning in May, 2020, not all testing facilities in and around Fulton County made COVID-19 testing readily available to children. This is an important factor that likely contributed substantially to the number of pediatric tests being far fewer than the number of adult tests. Second, data available from case investigations of young children depend entirely on interviews with proxies, which do not always result in the most accurate data on symptomaticity or source of infection. It is also important to acknowledge we did not have data on whether children were attending school in-person during this time frame, limiting an ability to make inferences about the role schools may have played in pediatric COVID-19 transmission; however, studies have revealed low rates of COVID-19 transmission within schools when mitigation strategies are in place.22,23 Strengths of this study include our data sources. In Georgia, SendSS is the most comprehensive surveillance data source for COVID-19 cases and includes data on cases tested across the majority of testing sites in Fulton County. This allowed us to observe pediatrics trends using the most data possible for cases diagnosed among Fulton County residents, regardless of testing location. Because our datasets included case age, we could also examine COVID-19 trends among smaller, informative pediatric age groups.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265742: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cost components: The different activities identified in the delivery and implementation of the COVID-19 vaccine were categorized under 7 key components; 1) Vaccine and related supplies procurement costs 2) Vaccine supply chain costs 3) Vaccine safety monitoring and AEFI management 4) Training 5) Advocacy, communication, and social mobilization 6) Data management, monitoring and supervision 7)Vaccine administration during service delivery.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Cost</div><div>suggested: (COST, RRID:SCR_014098)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study’s limitation is that the study relied on expenditure plans rather than actual expenditures. However, this was mitigated by augmenting this data with structured interviews with vaccine deployment implementors. The strength of this paper is that the assumptions, unit prices, and vaccination scenarios used in the cost analysis are country-specific and therefore can be used to inform local policy and may further inform parameters used in cost-effectiveness models. However, although the results are less generalizable to other similar low-and middle-income settings in the current format, they could potentially be adapted and adjusted to country-specific assumptions.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265775: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.02.21265755: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265766: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: All subjects provided informed consent and the study was approved by the NYU Institutional Review Board.<br>IRB: All subjects provided informed consent and the study was approved by the NYU Institutional Review Board.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The mean (standard deviation) age and body mass index (BMI) for the cohort were 67.72 (17.86) years and 34.96 (15.7) respectively. 46.9% of the subjects were female.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">After quality control, low coverage data were used to impute all common (minor allele frequency >1%) human polymorphism genotypes for each sample, using reference populations from the 1000 Genomes data sets.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>1000 Genomes</div><div>suggested: (1000 Genomes Project and AWS, RRID:SCR_008801)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 limitations, as the large COVID-19 wave in New York City in 2020 occurred, many subjects were recruited but we have not been able to assemble a large replication cohort as case numbers in New York City have remained low after the severe first wave. A replication cohort would be ideal, and we will await with interest future studies of these loci from data sets at other centers. This is a candidate gene study, which allows us to benefit from prior knowledge and rationale, and we maintain an appropriate type I error correction. Despite this, replication in future studies will be important. In summary, we document a number of IFN pathway lupus risk alleles that significantly impact mortality following COVID-19 infection, and these alleles provide some clues about key points in our viral defense against COVID-19. The study also supports the idea that type I IFN pathway risk alleles for autoimmune disease may persist in high frequency in modern human populations due to a benefit in our defense against viral infections.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.02.21265789: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265731: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265593: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Confounders and Moderators: Confounders included: sex (female vs male); ethnicity (non-white ethnic minority vs White -including white ethnic minorities); age; education (degree vs no degree); UK nation (i.e. England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland or other); household composition (based on presence of a spouse/partner and presence of children); pre-pandemic psychological distress (indicated by symptoms above thresholds on standard screening scales); pre-pandemic self-assessed health (excellent-good vs fair-poor); and pre-pandemic measures of smoking, vaping and drinking.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      While combining analyses from several UK prospective studies represents a clear contribution to understanding the potential impact of furlough, there are limitations that should be taken into account. Firstly, we were not able to achieve full harmonisation of measures across studies, for example, a number of studies had only asked questions on recent pre-pandemic smoking of those who were smoking during the pandemic, meaning smoking cessation during the pandemic was unobserved in those studies. This means the analyses of change in smoking for these studies focused only on reductions in cigarettes smoked, rather than outright cessation. The main analyses will be less affected, though there may have been some residual confounding from participants who had smoked but given up before being surveyed during the pandemic. Focusing on maximising comparability of measures across studies also limited our scope to explore more varied definitions with respect to frequency, quantity or other aspects of use, such as binge drinking, or concurrence of smoking and vaping behaviour. Our findings focus on the initial stages of the pandemic (April-July 2020) and observed relationships could change with the duration of lockdown or furlough, and subsequent changes to restrictions and the furlough scheme. Further research is needed to explore potential heterogeneity over the course of the pandemic, within workers who retained employment, and between different measurement definitions/thresholds. As ...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265676: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Our findings must be considered in light of some limitations, which we address here. First, we captured different degrees of confidence through an ordinal scale with 4 values, while the variability of confidence may be higher. Second, although we approached different sociodemographic characteristics, it is necessary to consider additional aspects such as cultural, ethnic, rurality and income, among others. Third, given the context of physical distance, the application of the online survey mostly reached those who have constant access to the internet and technological resources, thus excluding people with lower accessibility or knowledge about the internet and technology. Although in these limitations we highlight aspects that must be considered and remedied in future studies, it is necessary to clarify that the present study is consistent and clearly underlined the conditions that propitiate the willingness to accept an annual vaccination, booster doses and the vaccination of children. In conclusion, our study reports a high intention of the Chilean population to receive a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, annual vaccination and vaccination in children under 16 years of age. Vaccine acceptance is associated with trust in scientists, medical teams and in different media such as television and radio. Perception of risk is a factor that determines in adults the acceptances of vaccination or children vaccination or booster doses. This study provides the foundations on aspects...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265718: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical consideration and role of funders: This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethical Review Board of Mubarak Alkabeer Hospital and Dasman Center “Protocol # RA HM-2021-008” as per the updated guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki (64th WMA General Assembly, Fortaleza, Brazil, October 2013) and of the US Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects.<br>Consent: Subsequently, patient informed written consent was obtained before inclusion in the study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">10 To evaluate the serological response to BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in patients with IBD on biologic therapies, we measured levels of SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibodies post vaccination.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G (IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Laboratory Methods: In this study, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies quantification from plasma to assess magnitude of systemic virus specific antibodies was performed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit (SERION ELISA agile SARS-CoV-2 IgG SERION Diagnostics, Würzburg, Germany) based on the manufacturer’s protocol.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      However, our study has some limitations. It includes a small sample size of patients, so it was not powered to assess differences across medication subgroups. Furthermore, only humoral serological responses were assessed, it is likely that T cell-mediated immunity plays a possible protective role. Finally, given the observational nature of the study, possible confounders may exist, such as difference in biologic dosing and serum drug concentrations were not accounted for. A follow up larger studies needed to evaluate if decay of antibodies occurs over time and if a possible third booster vaccine dose may be needed. To conclude, this study showed that most patients with IBD on infliximab, adalimumab, and vedolizumab seroconverted after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. All patients on ustekinumab seroconverted after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 SARS-CoV-2 are both likely to be effective after two doses in patients with IBD on biologics. A follow up larger studies are needed to evaluate if decay of antibodies occurs over time and if a third booster vaccine dose may be needed.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265662: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Consents from the critically ill COVID-19 patients were waived due to the state of unconsciousness in these patients which was accepted by the Wroclaw Medical University Bioethics Committee (consent No. 394/2021).<br>Consent: Consents from the critically ill COVID-19 patients were waived due to the state of unconsciousness in these patients which was accepted by the Wroclaw Medical University Bioethics Committee (consent No. 394/2021).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Densitometric analysis was done by GelAnalyzer 19.1.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GelAnalyzer</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has several limitations related with small patients’ group and lack of mechanistic investigations. Noteworthy, our study group is well-defined and limited to the ARDS and sepsis forms of COVID-19. Although we analyzed several proteins related with activation of the inflammasome we did not measure other relevant mediators that can interact with this pathway (e.g. interferons). The present study would also benefit from the flow cytometry data of the inflammasome activation in circulating blood cells. Moreover, we analyzed only plasma proteins and it should be noted that they may not fully reflect the tissue response. Finally, we were not able to explain the heterogenic pattern of the inflammasome activity in these patients.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265714: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the University Hospital for Infectious Diseases, Zagreb, Croatia.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 limitations. The data on individual patients were not available and we could not follow up dispensed azithromycin from pharmacies to patients. However, it is quite certain that all quantities of distributed azithromycin have been dispensed to patients. We were also not able to report more standard measures of antibiotic usage such as defined daily dose or DOT per 1000 patient-days. Nevertheless, we did provide data on azithromycin overuse during the COVID-19 epidemic in Croatia. Even though an increase of 8.1% of total azithromycin DOT from the average of 2017– 2019 compared to 2020 seems modest, we should highlight the fact that Croatia is already one of the countries with highest percentage of macrolide resistant isolates among EU/EEA countries [20]. Macrolides were the second most common used antibiotics with azithromycin accounting for most of the use in Croatia in 2014 – 2019 with daily defined doses (DDD)/1000 inhabitants per day of 2.58, 2.82, 2.55, 2.56, 2.73, 2.72, respectively, after penicillins including beta-lactamase inhibitors [21,22]. Sample of Streptococcus pneumoniae with estimated national population coverage of 80% showed increasing trend in macrolides resistance in the period 2015 – 2018 (19, 34, 36, 32%, respectively) [20]. Resistance data collected from 38 centers in Croatia in 2019 showed 31% resistant S. pneumoniae to macrolides with a range of local results from 0 to 53% and 9% of macrolide resistant Streptococcus pyogenes with a range o...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265430: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We use tree-based GAMs [12] implemented in the Python Interpret package1.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Limitations: As with all analyses of observational data, this approach has several limitations. Firstly, while the machine learning optimization seeks to allocate effect sizes to most statistically reliable indicators, we do not use any side information (such as treatment mechanism of action or time-series data) to perform causal inference. In addition, in this study we have considered only binary indicators for each treatment, choosing to assume that providers are following dosage protocols to standardize care. Finally, while additive models are interpretable and accurate, they are still susceptible to statistical biases [21] which may cause different model classes to recover different effects from a single dataset. Further works should investigate the potential for other classes of additive models to corroborate or dispute these findings.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265672: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Cleveland Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB) exempted the study from IRB approval (FLA 20-038).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 several limitations associated with our study. The time-frame during which the study was performed did not allow for adjustment for anti-viral treatments (such as dexamethasone and remdesivir) which have been shown to decrease severity of radiographic edema (26) as these were introduced later during the study period within the healthcare system (late August-September). We were also not able to adjust for any variables other than those obtained at baseline when performing the longitudinal analyses, raising the question of whether other organ failure outside of the pulmonary system (renal) and fluid status have contributed to radiographic deterioration that is not directly associated with COVID-19 pulmonary disease. Lastly, while the study is a multi-center study across multiple hospitals and states in the United States, practices and procedures early in the pandemic were often institution-based and not necessarily guided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and/or the World Health Organization. As such, institutional standards of treatment may not have been reflective of other healthcare systems around the same time period. Despite these limitations, we excluded patients for which there was incomplete data that would otherwise require imputation and potentially affect our analyses. Instead, the study protocol structured the CXR sampling periods to provide early, standardized meaningful clinical data that may assist clinicians in prognostication and decis...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265711: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">29 strains exported and randomly selected 1,000 AY.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In a nutshell, the strain was first aligned in a pairwise manner with NC_045112 SARS-CoV-2 reference genome using Needleman-Wunsh algorithm(12) using EMBOSS needle with a gap penalty of 100 and extension penalty of 0.5.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>EMBOSS</div><div>suggested: (EMBOSS, RRID:SCR_008493)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265737: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Participants: The participants of this manuscript are from the CoVac study, which was approved by the ethics board of the Medical Faculty, Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg (certificate 67/21) and registered with the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute, Langen, Germany (NIS613).<br>Consent: After informed consent, we collected blood samples by venipuncture followed by serum collection.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Participants consisted of 36% male and 64% female with a mean age of 36 years (20-65 years) for the mRNA/mRNA group, 47 years (24-69 years) for the Vector/Vector group and 38 years (19-66 years) for the Vector/mRNA group.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Quantification of Anti-SARS-CoV2-Sp1 antibodies: Quantification of anti-SARS-CoV2-Sp1-IgG antibodies was conducted using EliA SARS-CoV-2-Sp1 IgG test (ThermoFisher Scientific, Freiburg, Germany) according to manufacturer’s instructions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-SARS-CoV2-Sp1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV2-Sp1-IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">ELISA: The presence of autoantibodies against cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP, IgG; Medipan, Dahlewitz, Germany) and tissue transglutaminase (TTG, IgA; Generic Assays, Dahlewitz, Germany) were analyzed by ELISA according to the instructions of the manufacturer.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CCP, IgG; Medipan, Dahlewitz, Germany</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>tissue transglutaminase (TTG, IgA; Generic Assays, Dahlewitz, Germany)</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Quantifications of autoantibodies against Cardiolipin, Prothrombin and β2-Glycoprotein were conducted by ELISA using the Random Access Analyzer Alegria (Orgentec, Mainz, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Cardiolipin, Prothrombin</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The applied cutoffs were: anti-Cardiolipin-Screen ≥ 10 U/mL, anti-β2-Glycoprotein ≥ 10 U/mL, Prothrombin screen ≥ 20 U/mL. Immunofluorescence: Serum samples were screened for the presence of autoantibodies against nuclear antigens (ANA) using immunofluorescence with the ANA HEp-2 plus kit (Generic Assays, Dahlewitz, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-Cardiolipin-Screen</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-β2-Glycoprotein</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistics: Statistical analysis was performed using Prism8 (GraphPad, San Diego).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265555: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committees of participating institutions and all study participants provided informed consent.<br>Consent: The study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committees of participating institutions and all study participants provided informed consent.<br>IACUC: All methods were performed in accordance with institutional guidelines and regulations.<br>Field Sample Permit: Cohort 6: This study was approved by the Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences (approval number IR.MAZUMS.REC 1399.856).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Researchers who performed PCR assays were blinded to information regarding patient data or etiological diagnoses.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Contamination: In addition to standard microbiological tests, testing for atypical respiratory pathogens (Chlamydophila pneumoniae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Legionella pneumonphila) was also performed in selected patients at the discretion of treating physicians.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All statistical analyses were performed using Prism version 9.0.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Prism</div><div>suggested: (PRISM, RRID:SCR_005375)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cohort 7: Singaporean cohort: The study was approved by the National Healthcare Group Domain Specific Review Board (DSRB 2014/00614).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>National Healthcare</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      The present study has several limitations. Firstly, the prospective validation cohort was relatively limited in size. Secondly, patient cohorts were recruited prior to the availability of vaccination. Accordingly, our findings do not apply to vaccinated individuals experiencing ‘breakthrough’ infections. Finally, we could not correlate the changes in IFI27 expression levels between the peripheral blood and the infected lung. Future studies (e.g., in animal models) are needed to unravel the coupled dynamics of IFI27 expression between these tissue compartments. In conclusion, the findings provided herein represent the first evidence that IFI27 expression has a potential as a severity biomarker for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265764: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">At the Integrated Research Facility (IRF) - Frederick, the virus was passaged by inoculating grivet kidney epithelial Vero cells (ATCC #CCL-81) at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 0.01 under high containment (BSL-3) conditions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero</div><div>suggested: ATCC Cat# CCL-81, RRID:CVCL_0059)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The resulting viral seedstock was harvested and quantified by plaque assay using Vero E6 cells (ATCC #CRL-1586) with a 2.5% Avicel overlay and stained after 48 hours with a 0.2% crystal violet stain.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero E6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">ADAPT was then run on the S gene alignment with the following parameters: 35-65% GC content, max.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ADAPT</div><div>suggested: (ADAPT, RRID:SCR_006769)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Infected cells were incubated for 48 or 72 hours in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium with 4.5g/L D-glucose, L-glutamine, and 110 mg/L sodium pyruvate (DMEM, Gibco) containing 2% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (SAFC Biosciences) in a humidified atmosphere at 37°C with 5% CO2.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAFC</div><div>suggested: (SAFC, RRID:SCR_008554)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Single-step SARS-CoV-2 SHINE reactions: RPA primer and crRNA optimizations were performed using the following SHINE conditions: 1X original SHINE buffer (20 mM HEPES pH 8.0 with 60 mM KCl and 3.5% PEG-8000), 45 nM LwaCas13a protein resuspended in 1X SB (such that the resuspended protein is at 2.26 µM), 125 nM polyU quenched FAM reporter, 2 mM of each rNTP, 1 U/µL murine RNase inhibitor, 1 U/µL NextGen T7 RNA polymerase, 0.1 U/µL RNase H (NEB), 2 U/µL Invitrogen SuperScript IV (SSIV) reverse transcriptase (Thermo Fisher Scientific), an assay specific concentration of forward and reverse RPA primers (detailed below), and 22.5 nM crRNA.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>NextGen</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">BinaxNow COVID - 19 Antigen self-test - clinical samples: BinaxNow COVID-19 Antigen self-tests (Abbott) were purchased from Walmart.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data panels were primarily generated using Prism 8 (GraphPad).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      SHINEv2 addresses these limitations. Lyophilization considerably simplifies the assay and facilitates its transportation and storage. SHINEv2 can be distributed overseas without a loss in performance. Moreover, the use of an equipment-free and ambient-temperature sample lysis method further increases the user-friendliness of the assay. SHINEv2 involves as few steps from the user as antigen-capture tests, while providing a 50-fold boost in sensitivity7,42,43. Importantly, SHINEv2 demonstrates perfect (100%) concordance with RT-qPCR, the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, in samples with RNA levels above our analytical LoD of 200 copies/μL. This level of sensitivity could enable the detection of every potentially infectious individual, including those missed by antigen-capture tests10,46. SHINEv2 can accurately identify several clade-specific mutations in the Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta SARS-CoV-2 VOCs, and it can be rapidly adapted to respond to emerging viral variants as well as other viruses in current and future outbreaks. Thus, SHINEv2 can provide critical information to inform public health responses, and it fills a major gap in point-of-need diagnostics. At the population level, SHINEv2 could be used to prioritize testing and vaccine rollout in highly-affected communities or to select subsets of samples for further viral sequencing. SHINEv2 could also assist clinicians in selecting the right treatment (e.g. monoclonal antibody cocktails) for patients with severe CO...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265761: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The Toddler Module included 94 observations from 47 children (29 ASD, 21 females) with ages ranging from 15 to 38 months (M = 25.30, SD = 4.31).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The administrations were randomly selected and coded by coders blind to diagnosis.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The administrations were randomly selected and coded by coders blind to diagnosis.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      Completing cognitive testing remotely can be done but has limitations, particularly for young children and youth with attentional or social difficulties. Solely completing ASD-specific testing does not give a full diagnostic picture and could cause a clinician to misinterpret difficulties or delays related to other factors of development (e.g., when social skills are immature for chronological age, but may be consistent with developmental level). For this reason, understanding an individual’s cognitive functioning is an important factor in putting their social skills and behaviors into context. Some widely used cognitive measures (e.g., Wechsler series) have been made available online, though there are limitations to which tasks can be administered remotely or without using shared materials and manipulatives. Caregivers may be able to act as facilitators in testing cognitive abilities or developmental level for children, though caution should be used in interpretation of results, as parents could unknowingly provide prompting, making it more difficult to determine the child’s true ability level. Interviews, such as the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Third Edition (Vineland-3; Sparrow et al., 2016), can be conducted over telehealth to aid in obtaining a thorough report on adaptive functioning. With these considerations and limitations in mind, obtaining comprehensive information should be prioritized to get a full and accurate diagnostic picture as assessment services cont...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265627: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: More details on the LSAC methodology, including sampling procedures and data collection techniques, is described elsewhere.24, 25 Our current study included 2291 Australian youth aged 16-21 years at the time of the LSAC Wave 9C1 in 2020.<br>IRB: Ethics: The LSAC has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) (Application number 20-09), and written informed consent was obtained for all study participants.<br>Consent: Ethics: The LSAC has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) (Application number 20-09), and written informed consent was obtained for all study participants.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Explanatory variables: Based on the previous literature,26, 27 the following socio-demographic variables were considered as predictor variables in this study: age (16-17 years, 20-21 years), sex (Male, Female), country of birth (Australia, Overseas), remoteness (Major cities, Rural/remote areas), education (Technical/others, Secondary, University/tertiary), employment (Full-time, Part-time, Unemployed), number of household members (Alone, Two people, Three people, Four or more people), living with parents (Yes, No), currently in a relationship (Yes, No), and the SEIFA (Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas) Index of Relative Socio-Economic Advantage and Disadvantage (IRSAD) quintiles.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Second, children were randomly selected from a selection of 311 postcodes, around 40 and 20 children per postcode in the large and small states, respectively.24 The LSAC collected data biennially since 2004 from two cohorts - the birth</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Another limitation may be the difficulty in comparing these findings to other countries, for example, Australia’s COVID testing rate is much higher than many other countries; 2.7 per day per 1,000 people55 compared to the US (1.9 per 1,000), the UK (1.3 per 1,000) and India (0.654 per 1,000).56 This may be due to Australia’s relatively high national wealth (and lower inequality compared to US), as well as finanical support for individuals and businesses afflicted by the pandemic.57

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265653: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.31.21265703: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Participants recruited from March 8 to March 31, 2021 by community family doctors provided written informed consent.<br>IRB: The Central Research Ethics Committee from the Cuban Ministry of Health was ad hoc appointed for this trial.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">VE at the primary endpoint was evaluated across risk strata for severe disease (19-64 years without risk comorbidities; 19-64 years with risk comorbidities; and ≥65 years), sex (female or male), and skin color (white, black and mixed-race).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study Design, Oversight and Ethics: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, stratified</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Primary endpoint was judged blinded by COVID-19 hospital doctors, reviewed by specially trained doctors and finally by the study’s Principal Investigator (PI).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The design required to achieve 90% power (and 2.5% 1-sided type I error) to detect a HR of 0.4 (VE >60% to reduce the risk of symptomatic disease compared to placebo), with a null hypothesis HR of 0.7.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      The main limitation of this study— as of most phase 3, COVID19 VE studies— is the narrow time window for VE evaluation. The waning of immunity over time and its impact on efficacy are key aspects that deserve the highest attention. At present, we are following time evolution of protection as well as its behavior towards new circulating variants; these aspects will be addressed in other communications. In conclusion, the conjugate vaccine SOBERANA 02 was efficacious and induced cross-protection during a dominant circulation of the VOC β and VOC δ. The third heterologous dose of SOBERANA Plus increase efficacy up to an outstanding 92.4 % preventing severe disease and death. Taken together, our findings indicate that SOBERANA 02 is a promising vaccine that can be used in a two-dose regime or in heterologous three dose combination with SOBERANA plus to fight COVID19 pandemic in adults population. According to the safety profile and efficacy, it is a potential vaccine for pediatric age.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265384: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: REMAP-CAP was performed in accordance with regulatory and legal requirements (EudraCT number: 2015-002340-14) and was approved by London-Surrey Borders Research Ethics Committee London Centre (18/LO/0660).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sample Collection: The REMAP-CAP Immunological Domain was an international, open-label, randomized convalescent plasma trial enrolling patients aged 18 years or older receiving intensive care-level organ support.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT02735707</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial Adaptive Platform Trial…</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04536051</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A Study of a Candidate COVID-19 Vaccine (COV003)</td></tr></table>


      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.
      • No funding statement was detected.
      • No protocol registration statement was detected.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.01.21265749: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Confluent Vero E6 cells seeded the day before were infected with the virus-containing serum dilutions for 1 h at 37°C and 5% CO2 with occasional shaking.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero E6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The pipeline includes several Python scripts that manage the analysis workflow.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, it allows for the filtering of genomes, the alignment of genomes in MAFFT (14), phylogenetic tree inference in IQ-Tree (15), tree dating (16) and ancestral state construction and annotation.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IQ-Tree</div><div>suggested: (IQ-TREE, RRID:SCR_017254)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Graphs were generated using GraphPad Prism 9.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265694: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The alignment of the sequenced reads to the reference SARS-CoV-2 genome (GenBank ID: NC_045512.2) was performed by Bowtie v2.4.2 (12) and additional parameters as end-to-end and very-sensitive.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Bowtie</div><div>suggested: (Bowtie, RRID:SCR_005476)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The analysis of the sequencing coverage and depth was generated by samtools v1.11 (13) with minimum base quality per base (Q) ≥ 30.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>samtools</div><div>suggested: (SAMTOOLS, RRID:SCR_002105)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The genetic distance plot comparison of the 44 sequenced genomes from this study with the NC_045512.2 reference was performed with the Python package recan using a window of 200 nt and a shift of 50 nt as parameters (28).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Molecular evolution of spike and non-structural proteins from ORF1a of northern samples: Selection tests were performed with HyPhy v2.5.32 (31) using the nucleotide sequence alignment and the maximum likelihood tree (previously described) for spike and non-structural proteins from ORF1a.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HyPhy</div><div>suggested: (HyPhy, RRID:SCR_016162)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The multiple sequence alignment with the P.1, B.1.1.28, the 44 sequenced genomes from this study, and the SARS-CoV-2 reference genome NC_045512.2 was generated by the MAFFT web server (1PAM / κ=2 scoring matrix), while the alignment trimming (deletion of 265 and 259 nucleotides at 5’ and 3’ ends, respectively) was performed with UGENE (17).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The tree visualization and editing was generated by the FigTree software (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FigTree</div><div>suggested: (FigTree, RRID:SCR_008515)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Considering the limitations related to a subsampled global phylogeny analysis, it is not possible to know if the absence of well-supported monophyletic groups is due to the missing branches and nodes representing the most related sequences and their ancestors or some technical limitation inherent to the application of the branch support statistical tests to the SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequences, since bootstrapping approaches require multiple sites supporting a clade to infer strong support value in near-perfect trees (57). In fact, SARS-CoV-2 genomes present a low number of informative sites, which may generate topology with low statistical support and ambiguous clustering of large data sets (58). Additionally, both SH-aLRT and ultrafast bootstrap methods rely on bootstrap resampling (57). Considering all aspects discussed above and the divergence among sequences, it is expected that the P.1 genomes (specially in the spike sequence analysis) cluster together and phylogenetic trees including multiple lineages present better statistical support values inter-lineages in comparison with intra-lineages. In summary, the association of diversification of P.1 sequences, the known phenotypic consequences of some signature mutations, the confirmation of positive selection acting on some sites and the absence of evidence for recombinations, all suggest that the main driving force in the evolution of P.1 viruses was selective pressure.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265449: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all parents (18 years or older and currently living in India).<br>IRB: Ethical Considerations: Ethical approval was granted for the study by the institutional Research Ethics Committee of Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research(PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">STATA 15.0 software (StataCorp LP, Texas, USA) was used for all statistical analyses.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>STATA</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      It is essential to thus engage various level of health care providers and strategize vaccine messages to parents especially from lower education status Limitations of this study that should be considered include the sampling strategy adopted by the study which may not be representative of all parents in the country, hence limits the generalizability of our finding. The cross-sectional design of the study should be interpretated carefully when accessing overall prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among parents in India. Our sample represented individuals with internet access and having mobile literacy. This does not necessarily reflect the country wide perception of parents towards vaccine and their intention to get children vaccinated. Despite the above limitations, our study assessed nationally representative sample of parents regarding their perceptions and intentions to vaccinate their children at a critical time, just as adult COVID-19 vaccination programs was initiated in India. Our findings reminiscent of recent research suggesting that there is a low demand for COVID-19 vaccine among parents, and highlights the need for longitudinal studies to measure the acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine at different intervals. Future studies are thus required to supplement our current findings to enhance vaccine uptake among children in India. Nevertheless, our study establishes evidence regarding parent’s hesitancy towards getting their children vaccinated and their concerns in coming...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265699: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265683: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">), Isolate USA-WA1/2020 (109 copies/ml) Zika virus, PRVABC59 (1010 copies/ml) Marburg Marburgvirus, H. sapiens-tc/AGO/2005/Angola-200501379 (1011 copies/ml) All samples have cell lysate from Cercopithecus aethiops kidney epithelial cells (Vero E6) as the base media.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero E6</div><div>suggested: RRID:CVCL_XD71)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Control - Vero 6 cell lysate from BEI Resources Human pooled saliva - Innovative Research The virus samples were handled in BSL-2 laboratory conditions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero 6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Thereafter, the TreeBagger built-in Matlab function was used to perform classification-based random forest with sample replacement and curvature-based predictor selection.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Matlab</div><div>suggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      With the limitations of the current widely used methods, there is a constant need for techniques that are rapid, easy to operate, inexpensive and can be applied to any kind of viruses with no/minimal modifications. The sensing platform we report here has the capability to be built into an inexpensive mass testing technology with a positive result in less than 25 minutes. Although rapid antigen testing can provide marginally faster results (15 mins), the accuracy is lower (44). The large area nano manufactured flexible sensor surface can be mounted on any surface like doorknobs, cylinders, building entrance etc. to enable on-site rapid testing with a handheld Raman setup. The capability of having the entire sensing area on a flexible substrate enables the fabrication of sensor patches that can be placed on face masks or skin for continuous surveillance. Our choice of nanostructure encompasses an architecture with realistic design parameters to enable one-step lithography-free fabrication while ensuring enough interaction between the nanostructures for increasing the detected signal. It is well known that Raman scattering is a weak phenomenon and signals from biological material are even weaker. Thus, to have a sufficient signal-to-noise ratio, we have used silver nanostructures with resonance matched to the excitation laser frequency for maximizing the Raman scattering signal. A less noisy spectrum enables more accurate use of machine learning algorithms for successfully class...

      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: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 6. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265687: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Organisms/Strains</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Self-reported race and ethnicity were classified into 3 mutually exclusive categories: Non-Hispanic White (White), Non-Hispanic Black (Black), and Hispanic (Supplemental Table 1).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Non-Hispanic White</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265628: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: IRB approval: This study was approved by the institutional review boards of the California Department of Public Health and the University of California, San Francisco.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Records included the decedent’s race/ethnicity, sex (male or female), date of birth, date of death, and open text fields for primary occupation and industry, described as “type of work done during most of working life”.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has several limitations. First, we may underestimate the relevance of education and occupation because we used indirect measures of risk that were indexed by codes for primary occupation in life rather than direct measures of occupational exposure. Second, we did not account for within-household transmission initiated by an occupational exposure. We may underestimate the importance of occupation since household members with different occupation codes share COVID-19 risk associated with each other’s work. Third, we only included confirmed COVID-19 deaths, conceivably leading to an underestimate of true inequities: some racial/ethnic groups may be more likely to die at home without COVID-19 testing and therefore not be counted as a COVID-19-confirmed death.(36) Fourth, we could only control for potential confounders measured in both the death and ACS records. Absent further covariate adjustment, education and occupation may proxy for other factors such as social class, intergenerational wealth/debt, parental education, and non-citizen legal status.(37) Unmeasured potential confounders of particular concern are comorbidities, housing composition and density (including housing instability, homelessness, and incarceration), access to high-quality healthcare, and undocumented legal status. However, these factors may also be part of the causal pathway from structural racism, education, and occupation to COVID-19 death.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265691: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21263107: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: qRT-PCR screening was performed using 2 µL of purified RNA, TaqPath 1-step Multiplex Master Mix (No ROX) and an in-house validated multiplex assay.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Synthetic RNA targets: RNA standards of the SARS-CoV-2 whole genome and variant spike proteins were provided by Exact Diagnostics through Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA (catalog numbers COV019, COV019CE, COVA, COVB, COVE, COVG).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Bio-Rad Laboratories</div><div>suggested: (Bio-Rad Laboratories, RRID:SCR_008426)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Primer Design: Primers were designed by using the primer3 server13.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>primer3</div><div>suggested: (Primer3, RRID:SCR_003139)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The desired fractions were then ethanol precipitated and resuspended in water, and their concentration was determined by NanoDrop spectrophotometer.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>NanoDrop</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Multiplex qRT-PCR with patient samples: Patient samples were tested in a similar manner to how we tested the assay’s sensitivity and specificity. 5 µL of each sample was combined with 15 µL each completed master mix using TaqPath and run as mentioned before.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>TaqPath</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265635: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 were some limitations in our study. The choice of vaccine was not randomized and there might be a selection bias in those opting for each vaccine. Our study only focused on investigating the immunogenicity at 1 month after two doses of vaccination. The durability of immune responses needs to be monitored; and indeed, this cohort will be followed up to address this question in the coming years. Our estimates to adjust for antibody waning was based on reports on CoronaVac, comparable to data for BioNTech was lacking. Thus our assumption of comparable rates of antibody waning for the two vaccines may not be correct. We did not collect plasma prior to the second dose of vaccine to assess the effect of the first dose of the vaccine, or acute phase responses, where earlier responses may account for the final post vaccine differences as our primary study endpoint was neuralization titers after vaccination. Similar comparisons between vaccines in teenagers and older adults will be needed.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265629: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265669: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Detection: Serology was conducted by Genalyte® (San Diego, CA), using their Maverick™ Multi-Antigen Serology Panel [15] that detects IgG and IgM antibodies to five SARS-CoV-2 antigens (Nucleocapsid, Spike S1-S2, Spike S1, Spike S1-RBD, Spike S2) within a multiplex format based on photonic ring resonance.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>antigens (Nucleocapsid, Spike S1-S2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A machine learning algorithm was used to call results using the Random Forest Ensemble method with 3000 decision trees.[16] HIV and HCV Serology: Rapid HIV and HCV tests were conducted using the Miriad® HIV/HCV Antibody InTec Rapid Anti-HCV Test (Avantor, Radnor, PA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-HCV</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS, version 9.4.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS</div><div>suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 this study include the cross-sectional nature of the analysis, which precludes our ability to determine causal associations. Although this was a binational study, sampling was non-random and results may not generalize to other samples of PWID. We also relied on self-report and recall for many behaviors, which may have been subject to socially desirable responding. Although the COVID-19 disinformation scale we utilized had good internal consistency, other COVID-19 related knowledge measures have only been recently developed and, to our knowledge, have not been validated in this or other populations impacted by substance use. Our analysis excluded participants who were recruited before survey items on COVID-19 knowledge and vaccine hesitancy were developed. Since attitudes to COVID-19 vaccines may have changed over time, we controlled for time in our analysis. Future longitudinal, qualitative, and intervention-development studies are needed to better understand contextual factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in this population to identify strategies to best address these intervention targets. In conclusion, we identified a concerning level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among community-recruited PWID in the San Diego-Tijuana border region, which was associated with COVID-19 related disinformation, reliance on social media as a source health information, younger age and co-morbidities. Interventions that increase accurate COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, trust and moti...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265601: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Of these, 33,302 participants who met the inclusion criteria provided informed consent and completed the baseline survey in an online format.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">6 Dependent variable: The dependent variable in the study was the following question about adoption of the COCOA: “Have you downloaded the Contact-Confirming Application (COCOA)?</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>COCOA</div><div>suggested: (TropGENE DB, RRID:SCR_005716)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All statistical analyses were performed using Stata/SE 16.1 software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 several limitations to this study. First, we recruited participants who were registered with an internet research company. Therefore, we may have selected people who actively used the internet, smartphones, and apps. However, we consider this potential selection bias to be negligible because the COCOA downloading rate announced by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare in December 2020 was 20.8%,23 and thus close to the rate in the present study (25.1%). Second, the present study used cross-sectional data for a single period of time. Therefore, the findings can only suggest associations between factors for this given period of time, and cannot capture changes over time within individuals. Third, in the multivariate logistic regression analyses, there was a possibility of unmeasured confounding. Unmeasured personal habits and behavioral patterns may have influenced the adoption of the DCT app.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265385: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics: The Johns Hopkins University Institutional Review Board (IRB00279223) and Lesotho National Health Research Ethics Committee (ID 12-2021) approved this research.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Stata (version 16.1; StataCorp, College Station, Texas) was used for all analyses.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 two additional limitations worth noting. First, these results primarily reflect nurses as only three doctors participated. While the backbone of clinical care is nurses and nurses are key to patient monitoring during advanced respiratory care, this training may be more suitable for doctors than nurses. Given the very limited doctor participation we were unable to stratify our analysis by cadre as initially planned. For advanced respiratory care to be successful it will be important for doctors to participate in future trainings and reasons for their lack of attendance need clarification. In addition, given the severe human resource constraints in the health sector of Lesotho, nurses need to function independently when providing advanced respiratory care since doctors are few and unable to be continuously available for all patients. Second, to deploy the training quickly we made assumptions about the baseline educational background and working medical knowledge of providers. Before revising and redeploying this training a deeper understanding of healthcare worker educational backgrounds is needed. In sum, this study illustrates the challenges and lessons learned in designing and administering an advanced respiratory care educational training program in Lesotho during the COVID-19 pandemic. If a LDHF approach is not feasible then future renditions of this training will need to be lengthened to at least two days and better incorporate case based and simulation training...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.14.21264837: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 a number of limitations that need to be considered when interpreting our findings. First, we were not able to have representation from the A5 priority group (indigent population). While we initially were able to get a participant from this group based on the survey response, we later found during the interview that this individual belonged to a different vaccination priority classification. This may point to issues with online data collection where researchers are unable to reach individuals from low-resource households. Second, there may be social desirability bias because we were unable to ensure if the respondent had other people with them that may have caused a change in their responses. Additionally, we did not disclose any political affiliations and interests, but participants may have been cautious in mentioning negative experiences related to vaccination. Third, there may also have been Hawthorne effect with participants choosing more positive responses considering our background as health researchers. However, we emphasised that they will remain anonymous and their data treated with utmost confidentiality. Lastly, factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination uptake is context-specific, and this paper does not aim to represent all situations and circumstances.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.30.21265693: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: In this study, written informed consent was obtained independently to participate in this study from each participant.<br>IRB: This study was approved by the relevant institutional review board (approval number: B210800024).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Immunoglobulin G titer against SP and nucleocapsid (NP) IgG were determined using the commercial chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (AIA-CL SARS-CoV-2 SP IgG antibody detection reagent, Tosoh, Japan).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>NP) IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2 SP IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Then, 50% neutralizing titer (NT50) values were calculated using the Image J software (NIH).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Image J</div><div>suggested: (ImageJ, RRID:SCR_003070)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analyses were performed using the Prism 9.1 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA) and JMP Pro 15 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Prism</div><div>suggested: (PRISM, RRID:SCR_005375)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS Institute</div><div>suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has several limitations. For instance, the data on SP-specific T-cell response immediately after the vaccination was lacking and the sample size of the cohort was small. In addition, generally, cellular immunity is weakened in elderly and immunosuppressed individuals. However, our study demonstrated that antibody titers do not necessarily correlate well with cellular immunity, indicating that the dynamics of cellular immunity are different from those of humoral immunity and suggesting that the evaluation of cellular immunity is warranted for long-term evaluation of the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265678: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The Institutional Review Boards of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the UMass Chan Medical School approved waivers of consent for the de-identified public health<br>Consent: The Institutional Review Boards of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the UMass Chan Medical School approved waivers of consent for the de-identified public health</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study population: Women who were residents of Massachusetts, gave birth in Massachusetts and whose infants’ dried blood spot (DBS) specimens had completed routine newborn screening met study surveillance inclusion criteria with the DBS specimens serving as surrogates for the women.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The receptor binding domain (RBD) of the Spike protein used as ELISA Ag was expressed using HEK-293F cells and prepared as follows: a plasmid containing His-tagged RBD was transiently transfected in HEK-293F cells using PEI.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK-293F</div><div>suggested: RRID:CVCL_6642)</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Testing laboratories reported replicate OD and IgG concentration results for all well locations from specified plates to investigators at the New England Newborn Screening Program (NENSP)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>New England Newborn Screening Program</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Our findings are subject to at least several limitations and biases. As noted, selection bias could arise because fundamental risk differences between pregnant women and the general population are not accounted for in our statistical model. The direction and causes of this potential bias vary: pregnant women could have less exposure to SARS-CoV-2 due to behavioral choices, depending on sociodemographic characteristics, but increased biological susceptibility to infection due to immune weakening. Nonetheless, estimates from cohorts with clear selection biases, such as blood donors or healthy volunteers, can still meaningfully inform seroprevalence estimates in the general population [18, 24-26]. Second, misclassification bias can occur due to imperfect test sensitivity and specificity. We have estimated specificity using a pre-pandemic sample of DBS and have incorporated it into the statistical model; however, we do not have an estimate for sensitivity. Accounting for imperfect test sensitivity would be expected to shift the seroprevalence estimates higher and widen the credible intervals (Supplementary Figure 7), due in part to the uncertainty involved in measuring sensitivity itself. By assessing the distribution of maternal antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 statewide and over time, our study provides a strategy for the systematic evaluation and estimation of population-wide cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2. Prospective use of NBS-based cumulative incidence estimates of exposure fo...

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265549: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: LNR/14/HAWKE/181) and all patients provided an informed consent.<br>Consent: The study was approved by the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: LNR/14/HAWKE/181) and all patients provided an informed consent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">24 Blood samples (FBC, biochemistry, immunoglobulins G, A, M, IgG subclasses, phenotyping and COVID-19 antibody levels) were taken pre-vaccination, then following vaccination doses 1 (D1) and 2 (D2) approximately 2 to 4 weeks following each dose.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>COVID-19</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>D1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay® (Abbott Diagnostics) was performed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265622: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Antibody characterization: Samples were tested at Vitalant Research Institute (VRI; San Francisco, CA) to measure the levels of total Ig and IgG antibodies against the S1 domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike antigen, in vitro binding and ACE2 inhibition against S1, N and RBD, and neutralization titers.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, renilla luciferase RVPs bearing Spike from the ancestral strain Wuhan-Hu-1, B.1.1.7, B.1.351, P.1, B.1.1.7+E484K, B.1.617.2, and B.1.427 were first titrated on 293T/ACE2/TMPRSS2 cells.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>293T/ACE2/TMPRSS2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Organisms/Strains</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, renilla luciferase RVPs bearing Spike from the ancestral strain Wuhan-Hu-1, B.1.1.7, B.1.351, P.1, B.1.1.7+E484K, B.1.617.2, and B.1.427 were first titrated on 293T/ACE2/TMPRSS2 cells.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Wuhan-Hu-1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Results were calculated as percent of no serum controls and dose response curves produced in Prism 9 (GraphPad) were generated to calculate 50% neutralization titers (NT50).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All tests were performed on GraphPad Prism 9.0.0.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265624: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Eligible individuals received an invitation letter containing a one-time code and instructions to visit the online study portal, enter the code, create an account, read and sign an online informed consent, input their mailing address, and respond to a brief demographic survey (33).<br>IRB: Ethical considerations: This study was approved by the MGB Institutional Review Board.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: Pepper provides Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and user interfaces for participants, study team and logistical partners, utilizes 3rd party services, such as Auth0 for user authentication and authorization, SendGrid to distribute email communications to participants, and abides by all HIPAA security and breach rules.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data from Pepper was imported and supplemented with data from MGB medical records and stored in REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture), a secure, web-based software platform designed to support data capture for research studies, hosted by MGB (36,37).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Pepper</div><div>suggested: (PEPPER, RRID:SCR_000431)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>REDCap</div><div>suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21264530: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265616: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics approval was obtained from each participating institution’s ethics research board, with waiver for informed consent for health records research (Supplementary methods).<br>Consent: Ethics approval was obtained from each participating institution’s ethics research board, with waiver for informed consent for health records research (Supplementary methods).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">19 Data Collection: Data on primary indication for admission, demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentation and course, coinfections, treatments, and complications were abstracted by the investigators from the patient’s medical charts and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>REDCap</div><div>suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 limitations. First, reporting may not have been uniform across centers despite the use of a study protocol and a standardized data capture tool. This includes but is not limited to the interpretation of chest radiographs, definition of obesity, and the severity of comorbidities. Also, the respective comorbidities can represent a heterogeneous group of diseases with different etiologies. Second, despite being one of the largest pediatric cohort studies with more than 100 severe cases, the numbers of some individual comorbidities are small. This might overestimate or underestimate the impact of infrequent comorbidities such as anemia and/or hemoglobinopathy, chromosomal, or cardiac disorders. Third, laboratory investigations were not systematically performed. Complete blood counts, CRP, and albumin values were missing in 4.2%, 15%, and 67%, respectively. We therefore could not assess the latter in multivariable models. Moreover, laboratory investigations were done at the clinicians’ discretion, not at set time points during the illness. Other parameters previously described as risk factors could not be evaluated. This includes ethnicity4,7,9,12 which was not readily accessible from hospital records. In addition, viral sequencing data was not available, accordingly we cannot evaluate the impact of different SARS-CoV-2 variants. Fourth, indications for testing for SARS-CoV-2 likely varied by center and over time, which might have affected the clinical spectrum of in...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265511: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: In addition, health care workers (HCWs; n = 92) from these units donated similar blood samples during the study period at time points 0, 1, 2 and 3 months after written informed consent.<br>IRB: The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Antwerp University hospital (EC number 20/13/156, internal EDGE 001070).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Measurements were performed in randomized batches.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobins (Ig) in blood were tested by three commercial tests, namely, Liaison SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (DiaSorin, Saluggia, Italy), Alinity SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA), and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (Roche, Basel, Switzerland), as described [26].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistics: All data were analysed using SPSS v27, R (version R4.0.4) and Metaboanalyst 5.0 (https://www.metabo-analyst.ca/).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Group differences in CCG profiles were explored by Partial Least-Squares Discriminant Analysis (PLS-DA) using Metaboanalyst.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Metaboanalyst</div><div>suggested: (MetaboAnalyst, RRID:SCR_015539)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      As limitations, this study is a case-control study and prospective data collection especially for patients who were not positive for SARS-CoV-2 was not possible. Secondly, although older healthy controls were enrolled for this study, this group remained younger and had fewer co-morbidities compared to the cancer groups. And lastly, as the study was conducted in an oncology unit setting, cancer patients that were immediately transferred to the COVID-19 wards and had succumbed to the infection, were not included.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265615: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We conducted a serological survey for IgG antibodies with affinity to trimeric spike, receptor binding domain and nucleocapsid protein targets from individuals in 309 households of which 24 were in the enriched group, and defined a cut-off value for seropositivity.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgG</div><div>suggested: (GeneTex Cat# GTX22573, RRID:AB_371961)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265608: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Prior to the interview, a telephone contact was held in which the reasons for the interview were explained, the necessary information was provided and an e-mail with the consent form was sent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265596: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To test whether ICTR is a better measure than TPR for inter country comparison, the study used regression analysis to test the strength of association and predictive power of these two indicators with the change in number of SARS-CoV-2 cases, and compared the respective R, R2, F and p-values.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      Study limitations: The study restricts the analysis to only five countries and hence future studies using ICTR can check its validity and implications for larger set of countries.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265604: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      However, strengths and limitations of our approach need to be considered. A checklist was used in this derived from the “PIET-T Process model” which was designed specifically to examine the scope for the potential transferability of healthcare interventions from one context to another. While it is a strength to have a theoretically informed approach, there are no established cut-offs for transferability. We chose to focus on those interventions that were amongst the most highly rated and tried to minimise subjectivity by using multiple scorers. The limited research in the area meant we had to broaden our scope to all workers and not just healthcare workers. Extracting intervention information from a previous systematic review6 allowed for a more thorough search of the literature to be conducted. Studies not written in English were excluded from the search and this may have led to important studies being left out of the review. Only one database was searched for updated relevant literature from 2015 onwards. Only one study gave any information about how the intervention could be transferred to a different context. The target context of this study included frontline HCWs in a hospital setting in Ireland due to the analysts involved being more familiar with this healthcare system, this may limit the generalisability of our findings. Interventions were generally poorly described and therefore replication of the original intervention may be difficult. A thorough examination of rob...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265578: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics approval: The study was approved by the University Health Network (#20-6177) and the University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Boards (#40300).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265610: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: This study was approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (Project #: 12862-C) and Howard University Office of Regulatory Research Compliance (IRB-12-CMED-76).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Patient demographics (age, sex, nursing home, known exposure, hospital admission, duration of symptoms, length of stay), symptoms (fever, dyspnea, cough, fatigue, myalgia, loss of taste, loss of appetite, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dysphagia, gastrointestinal bleeding, pancreatitis, cholecystitis), underlying comorbidities (hypertension, cardiac disease, diabetes, obesity, smoking, alcohol intake, history of luminal gastrointestinal disease, liver disease, alcohol abuse, inflammatory bowel syndrome, gastrointestinal cancer, pancreatitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease or peptic ulcer disease), and laboratory data measured at baseline: international normalized ratio (INR) (0.8 - 1.2); total bilirubin (<21); direct bilirubin (<5); creatinine (male 60-110, female 49-90); C-reactive protein (<10.0); lactate dehydrogenase (120-250); fibrinogen (1.6-4.2); alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (male <50, female <35); albumin (42-50); platelets (130-400), creatine phosphokinase (CPK) (male less than 60 years old 45-250, male greater than 60 years old 40-200, female all ages 30-150); WBC (4.8-10.8); aspartate transaminase (AST) (male 18-54, female 18-34); alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (38-126).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SPSS version 26 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for these analyses.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265544: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Response data for all SARS-CoV-2 S1 analyte injection concentrations was exported from EZSuite and analysed using Scrubber2 (Ver2.0g, HORIBA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Scrubber2</div><div>suggested: (Scrubber2, RRID:SCR_015745)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265499: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265588: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Organisms/Strains</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Six subject matter experts with experience in virology (KRS, JES), clinical practice (AB, CLL, JL), biostatistics (MW, KM), and infectious disease epidemiology (CLL, JL) were involved in gathering and interpreting available information.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>AB</div><div>suggested: RRID:BDSC_203)</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The most influential nodes were identified using the ‘Sensitivity Analysis’ function in the GeNie modeller software program (Bayes Fusion 2019).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GeNie</div><div>suggested: (GENIE, RRID:SCR_009197)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265598: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For diagnoses represented by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems version 10 (ICD-10) codes, the selected time window was three years, while for medications represented by Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) codes, the time window was one year.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ATC</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Feature engineering was performed in Python using the pandas61 and numpy62 libraries.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      To overcome some of these previous limitations, we used electronic health records (EHR) from eastern Denmark, identifying 33,938 patients who had at least one positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. To enable ML algorithms, clinical data need to be encoded into features that can be computed. Multiple approaches have been suggested for encoding EHR into computationally meaningful representations30,31. We opted for a simple feature engineering approach by considering the latest values or counts in clinically relevant time windows prior to FPT depending on the type of variable. Additionally, instead of characterizing patients’ relevant history using a limited set of pre-selected variables, the set of 22 features in the final model were derived using a data-driven approach from an initial set of 2,723 features that encoded available demographics, laboratory test results, hospitalizations, vital parameters, diagnoses and medicines. This approach enabled us to reduce model complexity to a smaller feature set while avoiding potential bias introduced by pre-selecting variables. While EHR are more representative of patient populations in terms of real-world data (RWD)32, some challenges arise when processing EHR for clinical research. Data collected from routine care may present inconsistencies33 that cannot be appropriately curated for in such big data sets, especially for information regarding clinical interventions or hospitalization status. We thus selected SARS-CoV-2 positive status and...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.29.21265248: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: All participants provided written informed consent.<br>Field Sample Permit: This work was carried out in collaboration with Moderna, Inc. and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), part of the office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Procedures: Participants were randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio, using a permuted block method stratified by site and by age group (< 75 years and ≥ 75 years), to receive concomitant administration of QIV-HD and mRNA-1273 vaccine (Coad group), QIV-HD alone (QIV-HD group), or mRNA-1273 vaccine alone (mRNA-1273 group).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: The SARS-CoV-2 Pre-Spike IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was a validated assay, performed by Nexelis (Laval, Quebec, Canada) as previously described.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To describe the SARS-CoV-2 binding antibody response, the following endpoints were reported for each treatment group: geometric mean concentration (GMCs) of anti-S binding IgG on D1 and D22, and D22/D1 ratios; ≥ two-fold-rise and ≥ four-fold-rise in anti-S binding IgG on D22.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-S binding IgG</div><div>suggested: (Imported from the IEDB Cat# mAb 201, RRID:AB_2848089)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>D22</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04969276</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study of a Quadrivalent High-Dose Influenza Vaccine and a Mo…</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

  2. Oct 2021
    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.27.21265591: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Computational methods and availability: All calculations were made in Python 3.8 and are available as coded in Jupyter notebooks on the laboratory Github (9).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Limitations: Our study was limited in that it focused on the population of individuals over 70 years old. The number of deaths in this age group was 61% of total deaths before mass vaccination of the older population, i.e., before the study period. During the study period the percentage of deaths in this group was 40%. The study period after vaccinations was limited due to uncertainties related to the Delta variant and the temporal period of vaccine efficacy in individuals. Therefore we limited the study period to the end of June before the Delta variant created new patterns of rising cases. Thus, the precise results relate to conditions in which the Alpha variant was predominant, and the vaccine efficacy was presumed to be high. Many questions about the effects of vaccination on the Delta variant remain unanswered with real world data as it is presently in clear how much of the rise in deaths may be due to vaccines wearing off. Calculating the precise number of saved lives by any vaccine is an impossible task. The counterfactual number of deaths if the public had never been vaccinated depends upon many variables that change because of the patient’s vaccine uptake. For example, we might assume that due to the high uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in Israel, the government became less strict in terms of closures, but how strict exactly it might have been in the counterfactual world is a mystery and only one of many variables affecting transmissions and deaths. After a steep rise...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265497: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Similarly, the NIBSC Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Diagnostic Calibrant (20/162</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04318314</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">COVID-19: Healthcare Worker Bioresource: Immune Protection a…</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265146: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The model was rewritten in RStudio since the original script was written in MATLAB.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MATLAB</div><div>suggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Lack of information regarding population and COVID-19 infection dynamics in each sewershed is one of the limitations of this study, preventing us from doing a sewershed-based analysis. Peak concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 were observed on the day when critical-level restrictions were enforced and the following 4th and 6th day (Fig. 4). Other observed concentrations after the first detection were generally in close proximity with the modeled concentrations for at least one genomic target. Different decay rates for N1 and N2 resulted in higher concentrations of N1 for back-trajectory modeled samples collected between November 16th and December 15th, while the difference between N1 and N2 concentrations for the rest of the samples was smaller than 0.35 on log10 scale (Fig. 4). The decay rate of N1 was calculated based on the degradation of genomic signals of gamma-irradiated SARS-CoV-2 by Ahmed et al. (2020b) and had a higher standard deviation of 15% and lower R2 of 0.79 compared to those values of N2, which were based on degradation of active SARS-CoV-2 (Hokajärvi et al., 2021a) (Table 2). Gamma irradiation of SARS-CoV-2 and relatively higher variations in the decay rate of N1 might result in significant biases in such a back-trajectory modeling approach. Therefore, we mostly consider N2 concentrations for back-trajectory modeled samples in the discussion. The critical level restrictions in Manitoba were applied when extensive community transmission of COVID-19 occurred, outbreak...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265261: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Both VAERS and v-safe conduct surveillance as a public health function and are exempt from institutional review board review.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 clear limitations in any review of preliminary mortality data. A comparison to national mortality data,20,50 suggests that certain causes of death such as accidents, suicides, or cancer, are less likely to be reported to VAERS. The predominance of heart disease as a cause of death reports to VAERS warrants continued monitoring and assessment, but may be driven by non-specific causes, like cardiac arrest, that might be chosen as a terminal event if no immediate explanation is available. Death certificate or autopsy reports were available only for a small proportion of deaths reported to VAERS. Finally, VAERS is designed as an early warning system to detect potential safety signals8 and VAERS data alone generally cannot establish causal relationships between vaccination and AEs. Other studies and surveillance systems, including the VSD, are needed to better understand patterns of mortality following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.23,51 This study has several strengths, including the large population under surveillance and comprehensive capture of national data from two complementary surveillance systems. Because the U.S. government purchased all COVID-19 doses and collected administration data, we were able to calculate VAERS reporting rates using the number of mRNA vaccine doses administered.52 In contrast, past VAERS analyses for other vaccines could only use doses distributed, which are always greater than doses administered as denominators, underestimating vaccine adve...

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265508: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: This formal determination supersedes TriNetX’s waiver from the Western Institutional Review Board (IRB).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement was completed (see Appendix).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>RECORD</div><div>suggested: (RECORD, RRID:SCR_009097)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has several limitations beyond those inherent to research using EHRs (Casey et al., 2016; Taquet et al., 2021b) (summarised in the appendix p. 2) such as the unknown completeness of records, no validation of diagnoses, and sparse information on socioeconomic and lifestyle factors. First, we do not know which SARS-CoV-2 variant individual patients were infected with and this might affect the protective effect of vaccines. There is evidence that variants of concerns are overrepresented in breakthrough infections (McEwen et al., 2021). Since such variants tend to be associated with worse outcomes (Nyberg et al., 2021), their enrichment in breakthrough infections means that some HRs presented in this study might be conservative estimates. Second, it might be that vaccination status affects the probability to seek or receive medical attention, particularly for less severe outcomes. Third, this study says nothing about the outcomes in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 but who did not get tested nor diagnosed with COVID-19. Fourth, this study did not investigate whether the association between vaccination status and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection was moderated by timing of the vaccine with respect to the infection. Fifth, we could not compare the different vaccines against each other since the majority had received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. Finally, as an observational study, causation cannot be inferred (though the specificity of the association with some outcomes a...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.27.21265574: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Human subject research was approved by the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine’s Institutional Review Board, the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, CHU St. Pierre, Hadassah Medical Center, and BioIVT clinical site Committees for the Protection of Human Subjects as described in Table 1.<br>Consent: Participants provided informed written consent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To support comparisons of natural infection and vaccination, two cohorts of pregnant women were evaluated.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Anti-isotype and subclass primary antibodies were used to quantify the total amount of each immunoglobulin isotype in a sample before (load) and after (eluate) antigen-specific antibody purification.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-isotype</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Antibody isotypes and subclasses were detected using R-phycoerythrin (PE) conjugated secondary Abs as previously described55.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>R-phycoerythrin</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In order to quantify the enrichment of antigen-specific antibodies, individual features (antigen-detection pair) were plotted relative to the total immunoglobulin isotype in serum across a titration range for each sample.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>antigen-specific</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>antigen-detection pair</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>total immunoglobulin</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Luciferase activity was measured using the Bright-Glo system and percent neutralization determined relative to control wells consisting of 293T-ACE2 cells infected with the pseudovirus alone.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>293T-ACE2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Structure Visualization and Manipulation: The sequence alignments were performed using Geneious</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Geneious</div><div>suggested: (Geneious, RRID:SCR_010519)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 was structurally aligned to the other models by domain using the MatchMaker function with default parameters and visualized using Chimera version 1.1551.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Chimera</div><div>suggested: (Chimera, RRID:SCR_002959)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For structural characterization of conservation among the 60 complete genomes of the Coronaviridae suborder (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/GenomesGroup.cgi?taxid=11118), Batch Entrez was used to find 585 associated proteins, which were then further down selected to spike proteins (N=56) and aligned using Clustal Omega.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Clustal Omega</div><div>suggested: (Clustal Omega, RRID:SCR_001591)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">This alignment was used to render by conservation and visualized using ChimeraX version 1.252.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ChimeraX</div><div>suggested: (UCSF ChimeraX, RRID:SCR_015872)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data Analysis: Basic statistical data analysis and visualization or raw Fc Array data was performed using GraphPad Prism, with statistical tests described in each figure legend.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 this study include use of several small cohorts, some collected from distinct geographic locations, from subjects of varying age, who experienced differing disease severity, and who were not confirmed to lack a recent exposure to endemic CoV. While all natural infection cohorts showed evidence of boosting toward the endemic CoV OC43, it would be beneficial to survey boosting in cohorts that better span a range of disease severity and ages to examine whether those variables impact the observed boosting effect, and outcomes of infection. To the extent that question has been investigated, it appears that boosting of responses to endemic CoV may be associated with poorer responses to SARS-CoV-228. Likewise, while both vaccination cohorts showed an absence of or reduction in boosting of cross-reactive responses, whether this absence is beneficial or detrimental cannot be determined from the data presented here. While cross-reactive antibodies were non-neutralizing, neutralization is not the sole mechanism by which antibodies confer protection. Cross-reactive antibodies could interact with receptors for the Fc region of antibodies found on the surface of innate immune cells and promote protective effector function activities including antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity39-41. To this end, a subset of monoclonal antibodies isolated from SARS-CoV patients that were able to cross-react with, but not neutralize SARS-CoV-2...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.27.21265522: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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:
      Several limitations of the present study exist. Firstly, we merely evaluated the optimal strategy between prioritizing the high-risk workers or the susceptible normal individuals, which can be more specific if the latter option was preferred. Following research can further explore the best vaccination strategy among different age groups by using our proposed model. For example, evidences showed that prioritizing the 20–49 age group and adults greater than 65 years old can reach the least infections and deaths respectively[19]. Considering with different interventions and the various existing vaccine coverage, the question that whether such conclusions are still valid is yet to be answered. Secondly, conclusions in this study are simply interpretation of simulation results. Such model-informed instructions need to be further verified by real-world research.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.27.21265563: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: 2.2 Procedure: The study received favorable ethical opinion from University of Cambridge Department of Psychology Ethics Committee (PRE.2020.106, 8/9/2020).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Of these 181 (130 female) had experienced COVID-19 infection (65 test-confirmed, 96 suspected) and 185 (118 female) had not.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data processing and Analysis: Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Many of the limitations of this study have been reviewed in our previous report (Guo et al. 2021). One major limitation of this study is that due to the novelty of the topic, it was not designed with clear, specific hypotheses, and as such much of the analysis was necessarily exploratory, resulting in a large number of analyses and comparisons. To account for these, Sidak alpha adjustments were used, with the result that only the very strongest effects survived at conventional statistical thresholds. We consider this conservative approach appropriate, but note that it is likely to be associated with a high type 2 error rate—and thus that some associations that did not reach these thresholds may yet be upheld upon further investigation/replication. A stated aim of this study was to generate hypotheses that could be tested in later, more targeted research, and thus while only the strongest statistical outputs should be treated as concrete findings, those that do not reach this threshold are also reported, such that they can inform and motivate future research. Of particular note is that, while rarely surviving corrections for multiple comparisons, variables associated with the Word List Recognition Memory Test repeatedly emerged as being modulated by facets of Long COVID. This is particularly relevant since it was predominantly this task that was influenced by severity of ongoing symptoms. All elements of this task (performance and reaction time) were predicted by Fatigue/Syste...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265488: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265512: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Participants were seen at home at randomisation day 0 (visit 1), day 7 (visit 2), and day 14 (visit 3) by a research nurse to obtain consent, provide inhalers and collect nasal absorption samples and nasopharyngeal swabs which were self-performed.<br>IRB: The study was approved by Fulham London Research Ethics Committee (20/HRA/2531) and the National Health Research Authority and was sponsored by the University of Oxford.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study design and participants: STOIC was a randomised, open-label, parallel group, phase 2 clinical intervention trial.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Quantification of virus RNA copies were generated using a standard curve using nCoV-WHO-Control plasmid of known concentration (Eurofins Genomics, Wolverhampton, UK).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>nCoV-WHO-Control</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis: Statistical analyses used GraphPad Prism v9.0.0 (</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">(GraphPad, La Jolla, California, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For image rendering the Gephi package v0.9.2 (Gephi.org.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Gephi</div><div>suggested: (Gephi, RRID:SCR_004293)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265525: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Informed consent to use of anonymized data was obtained prior to starting.<br>IRB: 2.2 Procedure: The study was reviewed and a favorable ethics opinion was granted by University of Cambridge Department of Psychology ethics committee (PRE.2020.106, 8/9/2020).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.3 Data Processing and Analysis: Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      4.3 Strengths, Limitations and Future Research: While the findings of this study are notable, there are a number of limitations in design and execution which warrant caution in interpreting the results. First, this was an online study. Using online data-collection means that we are less able to maximize data quality by ensuring that participants were in a suitable environment or concentrating properly on the questionnaires. We were also not able to clinically assess participants, nor did we have access to medical records. This means that we were reliant on retrospective self-report for symptoms and diagnoses experienced sometimes months previously. In an attempt to reflect the feedback that we received from support groups during qualitative scoping, we used a slightly different symptom list when individuals were reporting on initial symptoms rather than ongoing symptoms, and the latter also had a greater range of possible values (reflecting both severity and regularity). This made it difficult to directly compare symptom profiles at the different time points, and future studies should consider using the same symptom list and reporting method for all time points, even if some symptoms are unlikely to appear at a given stage of illness. We also used a binary present/absent reporting approach for currently experienced symptoms, which was not able to reflect severity—this should also be addressed in future studies. To look at symptom profiles in terms of current symptoms, we used...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265501: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.27.21265561: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Review Committee of University of Sri Jayewardenepura.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Detection of SARS-CoV-2 specific total antibodies: The presence of SARS-COV-2 specific total antibodies (IgM, IgA and IgG) were detected by using the Wantai SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA (Beijing Wantai Biological Pharmacy Enterprise, China), which detects antibodies to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgM, IgA</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Assays to determine antibodies to the N protein: Qualitative detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen in human serum was performed using Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (Cat:</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid ( N )</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, ELISpot plates (Millipore Corp., Bedford, USA) were coated with anti-human IFNγ antibody overnight (Mabtech, Sweden).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IFNγ</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265531: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics: This study was approved by the Moscow City Ethics Committee of the Research Institute of the Organization of Health and Healthcare Management and performed according to the Helsinki Declaration.<br>Consent: All participants provided their written informed consent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The plates were washed twice with PBS, then washed twice with PBS containing 0.05% Tween-20, and incubated with biotinylated anti-human IFNγ detection antibody for 2 h at RT.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IFNγ</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies and virus neutralizing activity in serum: Titers of the immunoglobulins G (IgGs) specific to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein were analyzed in serum using the automated ARCHITECT i1000SR analyzer with compatible reagent kit (Abbott, USA) according to the manufacturer’s standard protocol.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis: Statistical analysis was performed with the Python3 programming language with numpy, scipy and pandas packages.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python3</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>numpy</div><div>suggested: (NumPy, RRID:SCR_008633)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>scipy</div><div>suggested: (SciPy, RRID:SCR_008058)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04741061</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study to Evaluate Efficacy, Immunogenicity and Safety of the…</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04898140</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The Evaluation of Cellular and Humoral Immunity to COVID-19 …</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265407: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: The UWES-3 has been validated in five countries, including Japan, and includes measures of vigor (one item), dedication (one item), and absorption (one item), with each item measured on a seven-point response scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (always/every day).</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We used Stata/SE Ver.15.1 (StataCorp LLC, Station College, TX, USA) for statistical analyses.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has some limitations. First, because this study was an Internet-based survey, generalizability may be insufficient. We attempted to reduce bias in recruiting participants. Second, this study is a cross-sectional study, and the causal relationship between work–treatment balance and job stress or work engagement is not clear. Third, the concrete disease diagnoses of the participating workers receiving the support of the work–treatment balance is unknown. In Japan, the proportion of workers with mental health disorders is higher than that of brain and heart diseases 3), and it cannot be denied that there was a bias in these results. Fourth, this study was conducted during a COVID-19 epidemic, and we cannot deny the possibility that this may have modified these results. Further research should be conducted at normal times.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265170: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265301: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, and the study procedure was approved by the NCGM ethics committee (the approved number: NCGM-G-003598).<br>IRB: Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, and the study procedure was approved by the NCGM ethics committee (the approved number: NCGM-G-003598).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The assayers were blinded to which serum was cases or controls.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To ensure the statistical power of the study, we applied a case-control ratio of 1:3.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The results of the first and second surveys have been reported elsewhere.12,13 In the third survey in June 2021 (within 4 months following the in-house vaccination program), we measured anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies, stored serum samples at -80 □ for further investigation, and collected data on COVID-19 (vaccination, occupational risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and infection prevention behaviors, etc.) via a questionnaire.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing: We assessed anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies for all participants of the third survey and retrieved those data for the case-control subsets.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We quantitatively measured antibodies against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein by using the AdviseDx SARS-CoV-2 IgG II assay (Abbott) (IgG) and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S RUO (Roche) (predominantly IgG, also IgA and IgM).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To examine the antibody-mediated immune response at the pre-breakthrough infection, we compared their log-transformed titers of neutralizing (wild-type, Alpha, and Delta) and anti-spike antibodies using a generalized estimating equation (GEE) with the group assignment (case or control) and robust variance estimator.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-spike</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Neutralizing Antibody testing: The neutralizing activity of serum of cases and selected controls was determined by quantifying the serum-mediated suppression of the cytopathic effect (CPE) of each SARS-CoV-2 strain in VeroE6TMPRSS2 cells.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>VeroE6TMPRSS2</div><div>suggested: JCRB Cat# JCRB1819, RRID:CVCL_YQ49)</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We also qualitatively measured antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein using the SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay (Abbott) and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 RUO (Roche), and used these data to exclude those with possible infection in the past.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 (StataCorp LLC), and graphics were made by GraphPad Prism 9 (GraphPad Inc).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      We also acknowledge study limitations. We measured antibody levels using samples obtained 5 to 10 weeks (median, 8 weeks) before the infection, which might have decreased at the time of infection due to the waning of antibodies over time. Nevertheless, we confirmed no evidence of the difference between cases and controls in the association of the duration of time between vaccination and blood sampling with neutralizing antibody titers (Supplementary Figure 1), denying faster waning of antibodies among cases than among controls. Data on virus type were available for only 5 cases (all Delta variants). However, the remaining breakthrough infections were most likely due to the Delta variant, which accounted for more than 90% of sequenced COVID-19 samples in Japan during the fifth epidemic wave.10 Conclusion: In conclusion, pre-infection neutralizing antibodies against the wild-type, Alpha, and Delta variants did not materially differ between healthcare workers who experienced breakthrough infection and those who did not under the Delta variant rampage. The result points to the importance of continued adherence to infection control measures in the post-vaccination variant-circulating era, irrespective of the level of immunogenicity.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265422: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">cPass SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Antibody Detection Assay: To determine the neutralizing activity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, we used a surrogate viral neutralization test (C-Pass GenScript sVNT, Piscataway NJ, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions [9-11].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical Methods: Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 7.0 software (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      We are aware of the limitations of our study, including the small sample size and lack of cellular immunity characterization. The waning of natural or vaccine-elicited immunity remains a possibility outside the follow-up period carried out in this work. However, our results, despite being obtained from a population of different genetic backgrounds, agree with the current ongoing scenario (October 2021) in the United Kingdom (UK). A rampant increase in Delta variant circulation, up 35% over the two previous weeks, has been observed after all restrictions were lifted in summer 2021 [26]. However, taking into account the high number of cases naturally exposed to the virus and a high vaccination rate in the UK [27], as it would be anticipated by our results, the daily deaths are a tenth of what they were in the prior wave [26, 28]. Considering our findings, a more challenging scenario would be a predominance of other variants like Alpha, Beta, Gamma or Kappa, showing limited neutralization after full vaccination with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. To our knowledge, this is the first study conducted in a Hispanic/Latino population impacted by COVID-19, and our findings are a significant contribution to the still lacking population-based studies concerning virus-population dynamics in the setting of vaccination and shed light on the design of the second generation COVID-19 vaccines.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265494: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: The research assistants were conversant with qualitative data collection methods, had conducted similar research in the study settings and were all fluent in Luganda and Lusoga (the local languages).<br>IRB: Ethical clearance: The study was approved by the Mengo hospital Research and Ethics Committee (REC) ref MH/REC/39/06-2021, and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST).<br>Consent: As part of the informed consent, the participants were told about the aims of the study, the anticipated benefits and risks, their ability to participate or withdraw at any time, and assured that all information obtained would be kept confidential.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All data collection was supervised and assessed by the first author LM) who is a male, indigenous public health physician and the second and second third authors (NE WJ,) both of whom are conversant with qualitative research and the health system dynamics for both Iganga and Mengo hospitals respectively.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265166: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265500: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We calculated 95% CIs for predicted values of Rt that incorporated uncertainty in the relationships between neutralizing antibody titers and protection against infection and transmission (Figures 1 and S4).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S4</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Our study has several limitations. First and foremost is the reliance on neutralizing antibody titers as a predictor of protection against infection and transmission. Although the analyses here, and elsewhere suggest a strong relationship between neutralizing antibody titers and protection at the population level [3, 17] and individual level [32], other parts of the immune system, such as T-cells, also play key roles in protection from infection and disease. Second, our analyses use population averages for estimates of protection against infection and transmission and ignore age-specific variation among individuals (as well as other factors). Third, the data available to estimate vaccine protection against all infections was very limited and we are unaware of any studies that have estimated the full impact of vaccination against transmission given infection from the Delta variant. Finally, we assume well-mixed populations in calculating reductions in the reproductive number Rt. Clearly a targeted vaccination approach would be more effective than that outlined here if individuals that were highly connected to at-risk individuals could be targeted for third doses [33]. Finally, we focused on third dose boosters using the Pfizer vaccine, but third doses for other vaccines, including heterologous boosting [34], have also recently been approved in the USA and elsewhere. In summary, many countries have already begun to deploy third doses to protect at-risk individuals, and some cou...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265476: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Participant recruitment and study approval – Toronto cohorts: Negative control serum samples were from patients enrolled in cancer studies pre-COVID-19 (prior to November 2019; Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) Research Ethics Board (REB) studies #01-0138-U and #01-0347-U), which were archived and frozen in the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute (LTRI</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recombinant antibody production: The llama single domain antibody (VHH) VHH72-hFc1X7 (VHH72-Fc) was described previously (PDB entry 6WAQ_1) (17); additional VHHs (NRCoV2-04 and NRCoV2-20) were isolated in-house from llamas immunized with recombinant SARS-CoV-2 trimeric spike ectodomain SmT1 (Supplementary Figure 2).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>NRCoV2-20</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">VHH sequences were fused to an antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC)-attenuated human IgG1 Fc domain (hFc1X7, from patent US 2019 352 383A1).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>human IgG1 Fc domain ( hFc1X7</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The anti-human-IgG monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) IgG#5 and IgG#6 were derived from mice immunized with human IgG; heavy chain (HC) and light chain (LC) variable domain sequences (VH and VL) were fused to mouse IgG2a and mouse kappa LC constant sequences, respectively, to express full-length mAbs.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human-IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>mouse IgG2a</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 antibody-negative blood was spotted directly from EDTA Vacutainer tubes onto DBS cards.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All matched plasma and contrived DBS samples were tested using the anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA IgG kit (EUROIMMUN, Lübeck, Germany), according to the manufacturer’s instructions, to verify that donors were either positive or negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies prior to shipping to Toronto and Ottawa.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For spike and its RBD, the recombinant antibodies used were VHH72-Fc IgG (NRC; see above), human anti-spike S1 IgG (clone HC2001, GenScript, #A02038), human anti-Spike S1 IgM (clone hIgM2001, GenScript, #A02046), and human anti-spike IgA (clone CR3022, Absolute Antibody, Oxford, United Kingdom, #Ab01680-16.0).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-spike S1 IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-Spike S1 IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-spike IgA</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For N, the antibodies used were human anti-nucleocapsid IgG (clone HC2003, GenScript, #A02039)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-nucleocapsid IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">anti-nucleoprotein IgM (CR3018 (03-018), Absolute Antibody, #Ab01690 -15.0), and anti-nucleoprotein IgA (CR3018 (03-018), Absolute Antibody, #Ab01690 -16.0).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-nucleoprotein IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-nucleoprotein IgA</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CR3018</div><div>suggested: (Imported from the IEDB Cat# CR3018, RRID:AB_2833185)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Negative control antibodies purified from human serum (final 1 µg/mL; human IgG, Sigma-Aldrich, Oakville, ON, Canada,</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>human IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Anti-human secondary antibodies (recombinant anti-human IgG#5-HRP, goat anti-human IgG Fcy-HRP (Jackson ImmunoResearch Labs, West Grove, PA, USA, #109-035-098)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-human secondary</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgG#5-HRP</div><div>suggested: (Jackson ImmunoResearch Labs Cat# 109-035-098, RRID:AB_2337586)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgG Fcy-HRP</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, 100 μL samples of titrations of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S CR3022 Human IgG1 (Absolute Antibody, Ab01680-10.0), anti-SARS-CoV-2 S CR3022 Human IgA (Absolute Antibody, Ab01680-16.0), or anti-SARS-CoV-2 S CR3022 Human IgM (Absolute Antibody, Ab01680-15.0) were diluted in 1% w/v skim milk in PBST.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2 S CR3022 Human IgG1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Human</div><div>suggested: (Imported from the IEDB Cat# CR3022, RRID:AB_2848080)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2 S CR3022 Human IgA</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2 S CR3022 Human IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The final isotype-specific secondary antibodies used were anti-human IgG#5-HRP (Supplementary Figure 3), anti-human IgA-HRP (Jackson ImmunoResearch Labs, 109-035-011), and anti-human IgM-HRP (Jackson ImmunoResearch Labs, 109-035-129).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgA-HRP</div><div>suggested: (SouthernBiotech Cat# 2050-05, RRID:AB_2687526)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Two concentrations of secondary antibody IgG#5-HRP (0.09 and 0.18 μg/mL) were assessed using dilution curves of the VHH72-Fc antibody (to detect spike and its RBD) or an anti-N antibody (to detect N; Supplementary Figure 7), and the best concentration (0.18 μg/mL) was further tested on a dilution series of 32 serum samples provided by CBS (Supplemental Figure 8).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>VHH72-Fc</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-N</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We also tested anti-RBD NRCoV2-04 and NRCoV2-20 recombinant calibration antibodies, which were comparable to VHH72-Fc in reference curves (Supplementary Figure 7).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-RBD</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>NRCoV2-04</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For chemiluminescent assays, 10 µL of goat anti-human IgM-HRP (1:10,000; 0.80 ng/well) or goat anti-human IgA-HRP (1:12,000, 0.66 ng/well) were used as secondary antibodies.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgM-HRP</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Protein production: Spike trimer: The SARS-CoV-2 spike ectodomain construct (SmT1) with S1/S2 furin site mutations, K986P/V987P prefusion-stabilizing mutations, and human resistin as a trimerization partner (15) was produced using stably transfected Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) pools (CHOBRI/2353™ cells) and purified as described (8).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CHOBRI/2353™</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The construct was expressed by transient gene expression in CHOBRI/55E1™ cells as described above (15).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CHOBRI/55E1™</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">VHH and mAb sequences were synthesized by GenScript using C. griseus codon bias for expression in CHO cells and cloned into the pTT5™ plasmid.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CHO</div><div>suggested: CLS Cat# 603479/p746_CHO, RRID:CVCL_0213)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The ACE2-BAP cDNA was expressed by transient gene expression in CHOBRI/55E1 cells as described (15) with the addition of 5% (w/w) pTT5™-BirA (an Escherichia coli biotin ligase) expression plasmid as described previously (18).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CHOBRI/55E1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Nucleocapsid: N cDNA (corresponding to amino acids 1–419 of YP_009724397) was synthesized by GenScript (Piscataway, NJ, USA; using Cricetulus griseus codon bias) with a C-terminal FLAG-Twin-Strep-tag-(His)6 tag and cloned into the pTT5 expression plasmid (NRC) to create NCAP (16).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pTT5</div><div>suggested: RRID:Addgene_52326)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Amino acids 331–521 of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (YP_009724390.1) corresponding to the RBD were cloned into the pTT5™ vector using EcoRI and BamHI.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pTT5™</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The ACE2-BAP cDNA was expressed by transient gene expression in CHOBRI/55E1 cells as described (15) with the addition of 5% (w/w) pTT5™-BirA (an Escherichia coli biotin ligase) expression plasmid as described previously (18).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pTT5™-BirA</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ottawa: Samples from DBS cards were punched manually or in a semi-automated manner using a PerkinElmer DBS puncher (PerkinElmer, Woodbridge, ON, Canada; 3.2 mm discs) or a BSD600 Ascent puncher (BSD Robotics; 3 mm discs) and eluted in 100 μL/disc PBS + 1% Triton X-100 for up to 16 h (minimum 4 h) in 96-well U-bottom plates on a shaker at room temperature.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Canada</div><div>suggested: (Brain Canada, RRID:SCR_005053)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Other data analyses: Plots were generated in R using the ggplot2, lattice, latticeExtra, grid, and gridExtra packages.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ggplot2</div><div>suggested: (ggplot2, RRID:SCR_014601)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265475: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: As a simplifying assumption, the computer model works on the basis of a ‘7 day’ operational service, with no effect of day of week on patient admission and discharge (this is not always the case as there can be some delay in transferring patients at weekends). The effect of this is to underestimate acute discharge delays, with the actual number of acute beds required being greater than that modelled (i.e. in Figure 3, lower panels). This is important since insufficient acute bed capacity can propagate upstream to cause blockages in the emergency department as well as prompting elective surgery cancellations. Another aspect of the model requiring some attention is the assumption that capacity is fixed across the modelled period. With expected fluctuations in demand (Figure 2), an appropriately-varying capacity may appear reasonable. However, senior managers had stipulated that just a single capacity value was required, given the intended strategic long-term use of the model and an appreciation that any capacity shortfalls would be responded to on a more operational basis, e.g. with temporary procurement of additional capacity from the independent sector. In terms of model validation, an objective assessment was not possible since the Business Case had not been implemented at the time of writing, and a period of time would be required in order to robustly assess the reliability of model outputs. In general terms, validity was promoted through use of a model that wa...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265467: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265484: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IACUC: Ethics: Exemption for review by the ethical committee system and informed consent was given by the Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics - Capital region in accordance with Danish law on assay development projects.<br>Consent: Ethics: Exemption for review by the ethical committee system and informed consent was given by the Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics - Capital region in accordance with Danish law on assay development projects.<br>IRB: Ethics: Exemption for review by the ethical committee system and informed consent was given by the Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics - Capital region in accordance with Danish law on assay development projects.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Subsequent passages to expand virus stocks were performed in 75 cm2 flasks seeded with 1.5×106 Vero E6 the day before. 25 µL of primary isolate supernatant was used as inoculum in the presence of 2 mL infection media.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero E6</div><div>suggested: RRID:CVCL_XD71)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Extracted Influenza virus RNA from viruses cultured in Madin Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK) cells (A/Christchurch/16/2010(H1N1), pdm09-like virus, B/Phuket/3073/2013-like virus, B/Brisbane/60/2008-like virus, were all previously confirmed by PCR to be positive at high concentration (Ct <<30) for respective pathogens.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MDCK</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">RT-qPCR Validation: Nucleotide sequences corresponding to the Sof consensus genomes derived from WGS were aligned using the MAFFT version 7.480 (mafft.cbrc.jp), utilizing the FFT-NS-2 algorithm with a maximum of 1000 iterations40,41.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Alignments were viewed and processed in Jalview 2.11.1.4 (jalview.org,42) and codons encoding key mutations were extracted, translated and compared to RT-qPCR results.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Jalview</div><div>suggested: (Jalview, RRID:SCR_006459)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Positive and Negative Predictive Values were calculated according to the following formulas:where Sen = sensitivity, Spec = specificity and Prev = prevalence calculated from WGS consensus genomes.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>WGS</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All analyses were performed in Rstudio version 1.4.1717 using R version 4.1.1 and using the packages tidyverse (1.3.1), seqinr (4.2-8), lubridate (1.7.10), ggplot2 (3.3.4), cowplot (1.1.1), zoo (1.8-9) and ggpubr (0.4.0).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Rstudio</div><div>suggested: (RStudio, RRID:SCR_000432)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ggplot2</div><div>suggested: (ggplot2, RRID:SCR_014601)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265503: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis was conducted using Complex Sample procedures in IBM SPSS Statistics 26.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: The main strength of this study is that we addressed deficiencies in previous research by using more inclusive recruitment and data collection methods to increase opportunity for participation. This included providing translated versions of the survey, using interpreters, and multiple recruitment methods (including through social media, community events, and through community networks). We also included several variables related to culture and language (e.g. English language proficiency, literacy in own language, and years living in Australia), and focused on 10 specific language groups, in an attempt to provide a more nuanced description of the sample that captures some of the complexity and diversity within these communities. Whilst this inevitably means that not all cultural and language groups are represented in the survey, we hope that that by focusing on 10 groups with different access to translated materials, English language skills and proficiency in language spoken at home, that the findings have practical value and can inform decision-making to develop tailored supports and resources that serve these communities. This study also did not ask participants if they had already received the vaccine. State-wide estimates suggest fewer than 25 per 100 NSW population had received a single dose of the vaccine at the time recruitment closed(covid19data.com.au, 2021). Lastly, we were unable to incorporate specific items about the Astrazeneca vaccine ...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265493: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Our results are subject to several limitations. As described previously [5,7], while our model incorporates data on contact structure from nursing homes and separately models contacts between residents and staff, we do not further differentiate between types of contacts. We also do not incorporate any prior infection; we assume that all residents and staff have never been infected, which may underestimate the level of immune protection (particularly for those who are unvaccinated) in a setting with high rates of past infection. Although they are important endpoints, given limited data and heterogeneity in hospitalization criteria between facilities, we do not model hospitalizations and deaths and instead only distinguish between asymptomatic and symptomatic infection. This may underestimate the impact of vaccines on disease severity, as symptomatic infections among vaccinated individuals may be less severe. Finally, we do not explore the impact of supply shortages in this model. Given the high rate of resident turnover, increasing staff COVID-19 vaccination coverage will require fewer doses in most nursing homes than providing boosters to all vaccinated residents. This may be an important consideration, in situations with limited vaccine supply.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265408: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Limitations of such assays included semi-quantitative measurements due to the lack of “gold” standards, potential cross-reactivity, and inability to distinguish between antibody subclasses. Since reference samples with the standardized amounts of anti-pathogen antibodies or recombinant monoclonal antibodies are typically not available at the early stages of the novel pathogen epidemics, different laboratories calibrate serology tests with different convalescent serum samples obtained from the recovered patients. Lack of a single reference standard for assay calibration limits inter-laboratory and international standardization of serological tests, and is a recognized limitation. As a result of cross-reactivity, diagnostic specificity of serological antibody tests may not be sufficiently high to enable screening of the general asymptomatic populations for the acquired immunity against low-prevalence infectious diseases, such as COVID-19. For instance, 95% diagnostic specificity of COVID-19 serological tests36,37 and 0.3% prevalence in early 2020 in Canada would account for 5% positive predictive value. Interestingly, 90% positive predictive value at such low prevalence could only be achieved with a superior test with 99.97% diagnostic specificity. PCR and RT-PCR are undoubtedly the techniques with unprecedented analytical sensitivity. Sensitivity of protein assays, however, could be leveraged by the presence of numerous analyte copies (for example, ∼1,000 copies of NCAP_SARS2 ...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21264964: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265456: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics and regulatory issues: The survey was approved by CNIL (the French data protection authority) (ref: MLD/MFI/AR205138) and the ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud M editerranee III 2020-A01191-38) on April 2020, and by the “Comité du Label de la Statistique Publique”.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study design: Individuals aged 15 years or older living in France were randomly selected from the FIDELI administrative sampling framework, covering 96.4% of the population, providing postal addresses for all, and e-mail addresses or telephone numbers for 83%.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Eluates were processed in a virology laboratory (Unité des virus Emergents, Marseille) with commercial ELISA kits (Euroimmun®, Lübeck, Germany) to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG) against the S1 domain of the viral spike protein (ELISA-S), according to the manufacturer’s instructions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The sampling design was taken into account, with SAS proc survey and STATA svy procedures, to estimate prevalences, using logit transformed confidence limits that stay within the interval [0,1], crude and adjusted odds ratios with logistic regression models, and to perform statistical tests.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>STATA</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: The EpiCov study had several limitations. It does not cover elderly people living in nursing homes. The Euroimmun ELISA-S test has a sensitivity of 94.4%, according to the manufacturer’s cutoff. It has been evaluated in various studies, which reported specificity ranging from 96.2% to 100% and sensitivity ranging from 86.4% to 100%.(29,30) Anti-Sars-Cov2 IgG antibody levels have been reported to decline more or less rapidly, particularly among the elderly and subjects with mild or asymptomatic forms.(11–13) However, factors associated with the incidence of new infections between May and November, analysed on the subsample tested in both rounds, were consistent with changes in prevalence pattern.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265402: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The Lurie Children’s Institutional Review Board approved this study (IRB 2020-3792).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Twice monthly, approximately 25-50% of samples meeting these criteria are randomly selected for WGS.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Using residual diagnostic samples from pediatric inpatients and outpatients who tested positive by SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in our clinical microbiology laboratory, we perform surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 variants using whole genome sequencing (WGS) with the Center for Pathogen Genomics and Microbial Evolution at Northwestern University.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>WGS</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analyses were performed using Stata/IC 16.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX) and R version 4.1.0.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has several limitations. As a single-center study, our findings may not be generalizable to other geographic locations and patient populations. However, the referral area for our hospital in Chicago extends throughout the city and suburban areas and includes a diverse patient base in terms of demographics and medical complexity. These findings should be confirmed in other pediatric and adult populations. Further, the relatively small sample size and rarity of severe outcomes in children contributed to wide CIs, reducing the precision of the effect estimates for the association between the gamma VOC and severe COVID-19 outcomes. This study was limited to those infections for which SARS-CoV-2 was able to be sequenced, biasing the study to inclusion of infections associated with relatively low cycle thresholds (i.e., high viral loads). Although we performed multivariable analyses, it is possible that unmeasured confounding has contributed to our findings. Although we limited our definition of high risk for COVID-19 complications to those for which there are high-quality and reproducible data (i.e., meta-analysis, systematic review, or observational study; not small studies, case reports/series, or conflicting evidence) per CDC classification. (Table S2),8 these data are predominantly from adult populations and may not all apply to children. Nonetheless, based on our observations of COVID-19 severity being strongly associated with, and sometimes mutually inclusive with...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265509: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: We collected capillary blood on a Neoteryx Mitra® collection device, and tested for anti-Spike-SARS-CoV-2 IgG on a microfluidic nanoimmunoassay as described previously [15].<br>IRB: Ethics: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Canton of Geneva (Project ID 2020-02957).<br>Consent: All parents and teachers were informed about the study and gave written consent while children gave verbal consent to participate.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: We used the Panbio COVID-19 Ag rapid test (Abbott) which has been validated in adults for use with oropharyngeal instead of nasopharyngeal swabs [16].</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We used the Panbio COVID-19 Ag rapid test (Abbott) which has been validated in adults for use with oropharyngeal instead of nasopharyngeal swabs [16].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: Few large SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in young children in school settings have been documented so far [31,32], even fewer involved an investigation of variants of concern. As part of an ongoing prospective study, this investigation started less than 24 hours after the first case was laboratory-confirmed and involved the use of three complementary approaches. We followed up and repeatedly tested all contacts within four classes regardless of symptoms. Repeated serological tests proved useful to retrieve seroconversions following asymptomatic or undiagnosed infections. However, we relied on a limited number of cases. Not all children and adults were tested, which could lead to underestimating IAR and SAR. We might have missed infections among adults who were vaccinated between D0-2 and D30, as we could not distinguish between antibodies due to vaccination and those due to infection. Also, we could not test the household members of cases only detected by seroconversion at D30 with no positive RT-PCR/RDT, leading to a potential underestimation of secondary attack rates. The study was performed before the circulation of the more infectious Delta variant; estimates are therefore likely to be underestimated in a context of Delta dominance [33].

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265504: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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 several limitations to this study. First, all data in our study were obtained from public sources. Therefore untimely, opaque, and language-restricted data disclosure limited data completeness and prediction of subpopulation immunity. Standardizing reporting of COVID-19 vaccination and increasing data sharing and transparency could promote progress of the global vaccination campaign. Second, estimates of population sizes with contraindications and immunosuppressing conditions were constrained because it is difficult to determine what proportions of these populations could be vaccinated. Some countries use vaccines off label, further complicating determination of the eligible population. Third, country vaccination policy will change with more real-world evidence and experience; vaccine demand in our study reflected only the current situation. Our full picture of COVID-19 vaccination policy, coverage, and current demand in an ongoing epidemic deepens the understanding of this unprecedent vaccination effort. Disparity and inequity of vaccination rollout worldwide implies that susceptibility of unvaccinated populations in some countries may impede or reverse pandemic control, especially in the face of Delta and future variants. More countries and organizations should be involved in the global response to the pandemic, taking responsibility and providing leadership to overcome the complex challenges that lie ahead - financially, politically, and technically.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265116: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All files were downloaded and imported into Geneious v10.2.6 for trimming and assembling using a customized workflow employing BBDuk and BBMap tools (v37.25) and the NC_045512.2 RefSeq as a template.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Geneious</div><div>suggested: (Geneious, RRID:SCR_010519)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BBMap</div><div>suggested: (BBmap, RRID:SCR_016965)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>RefSeq</div><div>suggested: (RefSeq, RRID:SCR_003496)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Analysis of temporal signal: SARS-CoV-2 Gamma and P.2 complete genome sequences were aligned using MAFFT v7.467 21 and subject to maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic analysis using IQ-TREE v2.1.2 22 under the general time-reversible (GTR) model of nucleotide substitution with a gamma-distributed rate variation among sites, four rate categories (G4), a proportion of invariable sites (I) and empirical base frequencies (F) nucleotide substitution model, as selected by the ModelFinder application 23.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IQ-TREE</div><div>suggested: (IQ-TREE, RRID:SCR_017254)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ModelFinder</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The temporal signal of the P.1 and P.2 assembled datasets was assessed from the ML tree by performing a regression analysis of the root-to-tip divergence against sampling time using TempEst 24 and excluding outlier sequences that deviate more than 1.5 interquartile ranges from root-to-tip regression line, which included those Gamma and P.2 sequences with the oldest sampling dates.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>TempEst</div><div>suggested: (TempEst, RRID:SCR_017304)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) was run sufficiently long to ensure convergence (effective sample size> 200) in all parameter estimates as assessed in TRACER v1.7 27.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>TRACER</div><div>suggested: (Tracer, RRID:SCR_019121)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Alignments were generated using MAFFT v7.475 21 and visually inspected in AliView 29.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The maximum clade credibility (MCC) tree was summarized with TreeAnnotator v1.10.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>TreeAnnotator</div><div>suggested: (BEAST2, RRID:SCR_017307)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">ML and MCC trees were visualized using FigTree v1.4.4 (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FigTree</div><div>suggested: (FigTree, RRID:SCR_008515)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To do so, ML phylogenetic trees constructed for both Gamma and P.2 datasets as explained above, were inputted in the BEAST xml file as starting and data trees and analyses were performed under a logistic coalescent prior, which outperformed [Bayes Factor (BF) > 3] the exponential prior in a Marginal Likelihood Estimation (MLE) of model fitness, and a strict molecular clock, as specified above.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Gamma</div><div>suggested: (GAMMA, RRID:SCR_009484)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Discrete Bayesian phylogeography: A set of 1000 and 900 trees was randomly selected from the posterior distribution of trees resulting from the BEAST analysis of the full Gamma and P.2 datasets, respectively.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BEAST</div><div>suggested: (BEAST, RRID:SCR_010228)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Viral migration history between all supported location transitions was then visualized in circular migration flow plots using the package “circlize” 34 available in R software (https://www.r-project.org).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>https://www.r-project.org</div><div>suggested: (R Project for Statistical Computing, RRID:SCR_001905)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      The most important limitation of our study was the uneven sampling among Brazilian states and throughout the time, which may have introduced some bias in phylogeographic analyses. Although the number of genomes analyzed in this study roughly follows the number of COVID-19 confirmed cases in Brazil (Figure 1A and 1B), the smaller sampling from September and December 2020 limited the potential of our analyzes to identify large state-specific P.2 clusters and to accurate estimates the earliest onset date of communitarian transmission of this variant in several locations. In addition, even though the datasets here analyzed comprise SARS-CoV-2 sequences from 24 out of 27 Brazilian states, the uneven distribution of these genomes among locations might have biased contributions to the overall inter-states’ transmissions. In summary, this molecular epidemiological study showed that the COVID-19 epidemic in Brazil from September 2020 to March 2021 was characterized by the emergence and spread of the lineage P.2 and the VOC Gamma that were the most prevalent SARS-CoV-2 variants at different time periods in the country. The spatial dispersion of these variants in Brazil was driven by short and long-distance viral transmission and both variants circulated cryptically in several locations for some weeks before being detected. The VOC Gamma displayed a higher transmissibility than lineage P.2 which explained the faster rate of spatial spread of this variant and its establishment as the dom...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265444: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Informed consent was obtained from individuals.<br>IRB: Amasya University ethics committee approval was taken for the study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Those who had COVID-19, pregnant women, and regular medication were also excluded from the study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analyses were made using Excel 2016 (Microsoft Inc., Redmond, Washington, USA) and Minitab 19 (Minitab Ltd.,</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Excel</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Minitab</div><div>suggested: (Minitab, RRID:SCR_014483)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265397: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: Data sources and exclusions: Specimens were sampled from respective provincial databases capturing all RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 along with client, collection and testing details.<br>IRB: Ethics statement: Data linkages and analyses were authorized by the Provincial Health Officer (BC) and National Director of Public Health (Quebec) under respective provincial public health legislation without requirement for research ethics board review.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">About half the adult population in BC and Quebec are women with similar age distributions 18–49, 50–69 and ≥70 years: 51% and 49%, 32% and 33%, and 16% and 17%, respectively.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265510: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Furthermore, patients had to be able to give consent and to understand and speak French or English.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study Design: A controlled, randomized, single-blind, cross-over clinical study was conducted to evaluate both efficacy and feasibility of a Virtual Reality biofeedback intervention to alleviate RB in patients recovering from severe COVID-19 pneumonia.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Participant masking (blinding) was achieved by keeping both the procedure and the virtual environment identical for both tested conditions.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical Analysis: Based on previous work on breathing agency 13, a necessary sample size of 21 patients was estimated, using a two-sided paired t-test with an effect size of 0.65, alpha of 0.05 and a power of 0.8 to demonstrate a difference of 0.5 between the two experimental conditions.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Software developed by the laboratory in collaboration with MindMaze allowed to collect and filter respiratory data and to render a computer-generated virtual environment in real-time.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MindMaze</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All analyses were performed using R (version 4.1.0) and Matlab (version 2020a).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Matlab</div><div>suggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 comes with certain limitations. The main limitation is the small sample size, although it has been based on an adequate power calculation for a proof-of-concept study. Another limitation is that we included only a homogeneous population of patients recovering from severe COVID-19 infection. Our intervention should now be tested in a larger cohort of patients with refractory breathlessness to improve generalizability. Another important unanswered question is whether central desensitization to breathlessness while training with iVR DTx can persist when patients are off-treatment. Longer term studies with breathlessness ecological momentary assessments are therefore needed before such treatment can be widely accepted in a clinical setting. One important innovation this study demonstrates is the improved efficacy linked to real-time biofeedback, going beyond the classically admitted distraction from suffering offered by iVR30. Relying on the recent expansion of Internet of Things (IoT) technologies and of wearable physiological sensors in particular, our approach highlights how iVR DTx interventions can now more specifically target the neural mechanisms of pain and RB. Although in its current form our technology did not fulfill the expectations for home-use in our patients’ cohort, it paves the way for future e-health products that would not only provide monitoring but also a continuum of interventions from hospital bed to patient’s home. In conclusion, our study shows ...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04844567</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Virtual Reality Intervention to Alleviate Breathlessness (CO…</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265304: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265218: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">One person was dropped from the analysis because their self-reported gender [female, male] was listed as “ unknown”.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      As noted previously, the initial study from France that implicated SSRIs as potential therapeutic tools in COVID-19 was beset by a number of limitations (7). A few other small studies have supported the results from France. In a randomized prospective clinical trial of 152 outpatients with confirmed COVID-19 given either fluvoxamine or placebo, early clinical introduction of fluvoxamine decreased likelihood of clinical deterioration over a 15-day period (15). The authors readily acknowledged the difficulty in recruiting patients. The short duration and small sample size were other limiting variables. The authors recommended larger prospective clinical trials. A larger clinical trial on fluvoxamine was recently completed in Brazil led by investigators from Brazil and Canada (16). This study appears to support the value of fluvoxamine in early intervention in COVID-19 patients in preventing progression, serious complications and mortality. This study is pending formal publication. Another important SSRI investigation took place early in the pandemic at a San Francisco Bay Area racetrack (17). A large number of racetrack employees were diagnosed with COVID-19 in a very brief period of time. The racetrack physician offered fluvoxamine to the infected racetrack employees and approximately 50% of the employees took the drug while the remainder declined. There was no treatment available for early intervention in COVID-19 at that point in time besides supportive care. According to th...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265255: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Clinical specimens: Use of deidentified remnant clinical specimens from University of Washington Virology Laboratory (UWVL) for SARS-CoV-2 testing was approved by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board.<br>Field Sample Permit: Laboratory-confirmed specimens used in this study came from nasal or nasopharyngeal swabs collected in either PBS or viral transport media that had >500 μL volume remaining.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Vero E6-TMPRSS2 cells (obtained from the JCRB Cell Bank, JCRB No. JCRB1819) were inoculated with 100 μL of clinical sample, inoculated for 1 hour at 37ºC with rocking, washed with PBS, and overlaid with 1 ml standard Vero media containing 2% FBS.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero E6-TMPRSS2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">LDA), Abbott m2000 (Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott Laboratories</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Swift SNAP library preparation and quality control: Using SuperScript™ IV First-Strand Synthesis System (ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA, USA), 11 μL of extracted RNA was subjected to single-strand complementary DNA (sscDNA) synthesis, and 10 μL of the resulting sscDNA was used for library preparation using the Swift SARS-CoV-2 SNAP Version 2.0 kit (Swift Biosciences™, Ann Arbor, MI, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SNAP</div><div>suggested: (SNAP, RRID:SCR_007936)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Positive and negative controls were included on each run, and only sequencing runs with > 50% reads passing filter (PF) and > 60% of bases exceeding Phred quality scores of 30 (Q30) were accepted.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Phred</div><div>suggested: (Phred, RRID:SCR_001017)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For Sanger sequencing, reads were imported into Geneious (v9.1.8, Biomatters, Auckland, New Zealand), trimmed with an error probability limit of 0.005, mapped to the reference Spike sequence (NC_045512.2: 21563-25384), and manually trimmed to the start and stop codons for Spike.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Geneious</div><div>suggested: (Geneious, RRID:SCR_010519)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Probit analysis to determine limit of detection calculations was performed in SPSS (v26, IBM, Armonk, NY).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For SAREPI orders (requested for outbreak/cluster investigations), consensus sequences passing QC criteria are aligned using MAFFT v7.45 and the total number of pairwise nucleotide differences between sequences is reported as a table along with SARSEQ results.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Bioinformatic pipeline validation: To assess the performance of our bioinformatic pipeline and data processing steps, we used a set of benchmark datasets from the CDC (https://github.com/CDCgov/datasets-sars-cov-2).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Bioinformatic</div><div>suggested: (QFAB Bioinformatics, RRID:SCR_012513)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      One of the limitations of short-read sequencing using reference-based approaches is the reduced ability to identify large structural variants, long indels, and tandem duplicates. Long deletions often manifest as low coverage regions masked with ambiguous bases (Ns) and require manual review to confirm that they are deletions vs. amplicon dropouts. In the current study, we saw one example of this, and we have previously identified similar deletions in ORFs 7a, 7b, and 8 using Swift55. Taken together, our results demonstrate the high sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility of the Swift SNAP amplicon panel for SARS-CoV-2, which make it ideal for clinical applications. Our protocol is available at https://www.protocols.io/view/uw-virology-swift-snapv2-protocol-byw4pxgw with options for automation via robotic liquid handling systems. In addition, our study provides a framework for validating amplicon sequencing methods which have proved to be an important tool in our fight against COVID-19 and will be for other emerging pathogens.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265247: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In this section, we have discussed various methods employed in our study including data collection as well as development and evaluation of the machine learning models for predicting the diagnosis of COVID-19. 3.1 Data: We built a smell and taste tracking web app using open-source software vue.js, Flask, Python and JavaScript.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265195: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Serology testing: Two semi-quantitative and one quantitative serological tests were used to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: i) Wantai SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA, an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for qualitative detection of total IgG and IgM antibodies to the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that was performed on 434 samples; ii) Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay, a chemiluminescent microparticle assay (CMIA) for the qualitative detection of IgG Abs to the nucleocapsid protein that was performed on 1019 samples; and iii) Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant, second generation CMIA for quantitative determination of IgG Abs to the RBD of the S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, including the neutralizing Abs that was performed on 2560 samples.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265254: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Data Collection: After review by the Research Ethics Committee of University of Sharjah (REC 21-07-15-01-S) and approval from the hospital board, data was collected from the written and electronic health records of included patients within the hospital.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Pregnant women, patients who were admitted to/transferred to/discharged from the intensive care unit (ICU), patients who were receiving antibiotics prior to admission were excluded from the study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sample size calculation with a confidence level of 95% and margin of error of 5% for UAE’s population of 9.89 million in 2020, (9) determined the minimum required sample size to be 384 participants.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis: Data was imported from Microsoft Excel to IBM SPSS, version 25 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), for analysis and interpretation.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Microsoft Excel</div><div>suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      The limitation of this study lies in its relatively small sample size. Combined with its design as a single-center study, there is limited generalizability of the results. Lack of information on post-discharge health status of these patients could be a potential limitation addressed by future studies to expand knowledge on management of this illness. There is growing concern for a potential rise in antimicrobial resistance due to increased antibiotic prescription for COVID-19 patients around the world. The potential of bold strategies as adopted in our study, pave the way forward to cement existing antimicrobial stewardship programs. A recent study conducted in the UAE identified that 63.4% medical professionals follow national health authorities as their primary source of COVID-19 information. (21) Thus, a national framework would serve as a context-specific reference covering education about antimicrobial resistance, tracking local patterns, development of clinical guidelines and antibiotic control.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265177: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      A related limitation of our framework is that it requires one to specify the future weekly contact rates in order to project future cases. One way to approach this issue would be to use contact rates from previous weeks and assume these will be representative of future contact rates. Such projections would be interpreted as a possible scenario if future contact rates remained similar to historical levels. A distinct benefit of our model is that future projections can be made based on clear assumptions about contact rates in the underlying population, as opposed to more challenging assumptions about changes in transmission rates (which could be due to many factors). Our modeling framework is based on deterministic ODE equations, which are well suited to capturing smooth changes in transmission but may not be suitable for sudden fluctuations. The sensitivity to underlying contact rates can be a limitation if contact data are, for any reason (including poor data quality) unstable. Fluctuating contact rates could lead to unrealistic predictions as the model tries to capture these dynamics with a series of small exponential growths and decays. This appears to be the case for our 18-24 age group, which typically had unstable contact rates due to small numbers of survey respondents of this age. We show the importance of including population-based contact rates in modeling of COVID-19. In this study, we used self-reported rates of close contact from the BC-Mix survey which began duri...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265200: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: This study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of UML (protocol number 20-149-BUC-FUL). 1.2. Participants: Participants were healthy individuals, as self-reported and determined by a screening asked during recruitment consent, and already enrolled into the surveillance program at UML.<br>Consent: Adults over 18 years of age were given an informed consent form by study staff and asked whether they would agree to being swabbed with an experimental swab by a trained nurse to the control swab required for testing.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">They were all tested first with NP swabs and then randomly swabbed nasally first with the ClearTip™ N swab or commercially available comparator (Copan).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Paired t-test, equivalence tests and the weighted generalized score method were analyzed using SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS Institute</div><div>suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Additional Student’s T-test (T-test) with a p-value of < 0.05 was performed with Origin(Pro), Version 2021b OriginLab Corporation, Northampton, MA, USA.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>OriginLab Corporation</div><div>suggested: (Origin, RRID:SCR_014212)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265103: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: The sample size: First, a pilot study to get acquainted with the research environment, how patients respond to questionnaires, changes needed General questionnaire of demographic characteristics and socio-economic factors, determining the number of samples and the accuracy of the study was conducted.<br>IRB: Then, the sample size was calculated 124 cases and an equal number of controls with 5% drop, 95% power, and 95% confidence interval and using the following formula: Ethics: All protocols used in this study were approved by the Ethics Committee of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (Ethical Code: IR.TBZMED.REC.1399.1053).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study design and Setting: The design of this study will be a case-control study which will be performed on men and women aged 20-60 years living in North Khorasan province, Iran, in a 1:1 ratio between case and control groups.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Then, the sample size was calculated 124 cases and an equal number of controls with 5% drop, 95% power, and 95% confidence interval and using the following formula: Ethics: All protocols used in this study were approved by the Ethics Committee of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (Ethical Code: IR.TBZMED.REC.1399.1053).</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis: Statistical data analysis will be performed using SPSS software (version 16.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      The study’s limitations are self-reporting of dietary intakes, and lack of cooperation of some patients in the end, which may lead to patients being replaced.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265300: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical Aspects: The study was approved by the local institutional review board (Reference no. 4.112.403), and it is in accordance with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement (8).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Kidney transplant recipients and pregnant woman were not considered for the purpose of this study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical Analysis were performed using GraphPad Prism, version 5.0 for Windows, R statistical software, version 4.0.5 and Rstudio, version 1.4.1106 (R Development Core Team, 2020).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Rstudio</div><div>suggested: (RStudio, RRID:SCR_000432)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>R Development Core</div><div>suggested: (R Project for Statistical Computing, RRID:SCR_001905)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      We recognize that our study has some important limitations, mainly regarding the low number of patients, the unicentric experience, and the retrospective design. Also, the impossibility to consider the fluid balance of patients certainly impaired the real volume depletion analysis that would be ideally done. However, to our knowledge this is the first study that recalls some attention to the possibility of hydroelectrolytic disorders in patients who are recovering from AKI in COVID-19 patients, and we believe that this concern needs to exist when caring of patients with potential risk of insensible fluid loss.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.26.21265363: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265370: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the competent USLL 7 Ethics Committee on the end of August, 2021.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IgG results were expressed in Binding Antibody Units (BAU) per mL, using the manufacturer’s conversion factors, based on the WHO International Standard Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin (NIBSC code 20-136) [5].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265188: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Participants signed written informed consent forms administered digitally.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We aimed to increase variability of interview data by stratifying the sample by county, practice setting (urban vs. rural) and gender (male vs female).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Pharmacies had been selected randomly from the list of licensed pharmacies.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265140: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The raw data generated were filtered by Trimmomatic v0.39 [9], which trimmed low-quality bases (Phred score < 30) and removed short reads (<50 nucleotides) as well as adapters and primer sequences.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Trimmomatic</div><div>suggested: (Trimmomatic, RRID:SCR_011848)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Reads were then mapped against the SARS-CoV-2 reference genome (accession number: NC_045512.2) with Bowtie2 [10].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Bowtie2</div><div>suggested: (Bowtie 2, RRID:SCR_016368)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The resulting BAM files were manipulated with SAMtools, BCFtools [11], and BEDtools [12] to generate consensus genome sequences.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAMtools</div><div>suggested: (SAMTOOLS, RRID:SCR_002105)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BEDtools</div><div>suggested: (BEDTools, RRID:SCR_006646)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">These sequences were aligned with MAFFT v7.475[14], and a maximum likelihood tree was inferred on IQ-Tree 2 [15], under the GTR+F+I+G4 model [16], [17].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Maximum likelihood trees were inferred from these datasets, and their temporal signal was evaluated with tempest v1.5.3 [19].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>tempest</div><div>suggested: (TempEst, RRID:SCR_017304)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Time scaled phylogenies were then inferred from these datasets with BEAST v1.10.4 [20], using: (i) the HKY+I+G4 nucleotide substitution model [17], (ii) the strict molecular clock model, (iii) the non-parametric coalescent skygrid tree prior [21] and (iv) a symmetric discrete phylogeographic model [22].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BEAST</div><div>suggested: (BEAST, RRID:SCR_010228)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Our study presents some limitations. First, the household survey is less likely to sample severe cases, thus underestimating symptomatic Covid-19. Second, all clinical data were self-reported, which may lead to reporting bias [46]. Third, we could not sequence all PCR positive samples due to the low viral load and sequencing technology employed. Nevertheless, our study shows the potential to integrate different epidemiological inquiries (prevalence, seroprevalence, and genomic surveillance) to describe pandemic dispersion adequately. Moreover, our findings present original and relevant evidence that has helped local government authorities to guide pandemic management.

      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: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 21. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21264706: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265171: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: At the time of enrollment, all participants provided written consent.<br>IRB: This study was reviewed and approved by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at each of the participating institutions.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The resulting serum-neutralizing antibodies were calculated as the 50% inhibitory dilution (ID50).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ID50</div><div>suggested: (bNAber Cat# bNAberID_50, RRID:AB_2491067)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">These serologic assays, which quantify the amount of host serum needed to neutralize pseudovirus infectivity, an in-vitro proxy for antibody mediated protection against SARS-CoV-2, were conducted by LabCorp (South San Francisco, CA) staff blinded to SARS-CoV-2 infection status and vaccine product (Supplementary Appendix: Methods)[14].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study also has at least six limitations. First, nAb responses could only be examined within the time intervals of vaccination that occurred in our study. Inferences regarding antibody response following mRNA vaccine dose-1 are limited to the 2 to 3 weeks between vaccine doses, because most individuals had their second vaccine dose at the shortest recommended time interval. Second, serum-neutralizing antibodies were measured against USA-WA1/2020-spike pseudotype virus rather than with a live virus assay. However, previous studies have shown concordance between nonreplicating pseudotype neutralization and SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assays [39, 40]. Third, the nAb assays against USA-WA1/2020-spike pseudotype virus were performed by LabCorp using the PhenoSense® assay. The assay was validated before WHO standards were widely available, and the results are not reported in international units, therefore they are not directly translatable to assays performed by other laboratories. Fourth, cellular mediated immunogenicity could not be examined, which additionally contributes to clinical protection. In the same cohort, high vaccine effectiveness was noted in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection starting 14 days after mRNA vaccine dose 1 [12]. Fifth, because of sparse data and limited sociodemographic and health heterogeneity, we were unable to fully examine or adjust for factors that may be associated with immune response to infection or vaccination. Data represented here was collected...

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265355: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265462: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Field Sample Permit: This study was carried out following the ethical principles described in the Declaration of Helsinki (64th WMA General Assembly, Fortaleza, Brazil, October 2013), the International Council for Harmonization Good Clinical Practice (ICH GCP) E6 (R2), New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rule-2019 issued by the Government of India and ethical guidelines for biomedical research on human subjects issued by the Indian Council of Medical Research.<br>IRB: The study received approvals from the Independent Ethics Committees of all the participating sites.<br>Consent: The patients provided written informed consent before the initiation of study procedures.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study participants: The following patients were included in the study: Adult male or female patients with confirmed virologic diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction/rapid antigen test/equivalent), hospitalized with moderate-to-severe ARDS due to worsening of COVID-19 as defined by PFR ratio of ≤200 with oxygen saturation at ≤94% at rest in ambient air or requiring supplemental oxygen therapy with one or more inflammatory markers (serum ferritin, LDH, D-dimer, CRP or IL-6) raised above the upper limit of normal.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Patients with known severe allergic reactions to monoclonal antibodies, with active tuberculosis (TB)/inadequately treated TB/latent TB, on oral anti-rejection or any immune-suppressive drug in the last 6 months and those who had participated in any clinical trial using an anti-IL-6 therapy, were excluded from the study.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-rejection</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-IL-6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All statistical analyses were performed using SAS® (version 9.4 or higher) system software (SAS Institute Inc.,</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS®</div><div>suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS Institute</div><div>suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This trial has the limitation of being a single-arm, open-label study. Typically, collection of concurrent data from the same hospitals/centres can be useful for comparison, however, amidst a pandemic setting this was not feasible. The meta-analysis on concurrent control data collected from nearly 12,000 patients during the same period has the limitation of having high heterogenicity, though, enough care was taken to match the populations, disease severity, BSC and treatment with other immunomodulators.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265403: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265455: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study has been approved by the Ethical committees of Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi and VBS Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, India.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.25.21265324: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the Kobe University Hospital Ethics Committee (No. B2056714) and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.<br>Consent: All patients provided written informed consent for this study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Antibody titers against S1 were measured using the QuaResearch COVID-19 Human IgM IgG ELISA kit (Spike Protein-S1) (Cellspect, Inc., RCOEL961S1, Iwate, Japan).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Measurement of inflammatory cytokines: Serum inflammatory cytokines (Interferon [IL]-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor [TNF] -α, interferon gamma [IFN]-γ, and granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor [GM-CSF]) were probed using Bio Plex Pro Human Cytokine plex Panel (Bio-Rad, CA, USA) multiplex magnetic bead-based antibody detection kits following the manufacturer’s instructions.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IL-4,</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IL-4</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IL-6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IL-8</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IL-10</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Standard curves for each analyte were generated using standards provided by the manufacturer and the collected data were analyzed using Bio-Plex Manager™ Software version 6.1 (Bio-Rad).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Bio-Plex</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Manager™</div><div>suggested: (?Manager, RRID:SCR_016865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265451: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis was conducted using Complex Sample procedures in IBM SPSS Statistics 26</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: This study is strengthened by recruitment methods that are inclusive and reduce barriers to participation, such as translated versions of the survey, use of interpreters, and use of multiple recruitment methods (including through social media, community events, and through community networks). Further, by including several variables related to culture and language (e.g. English language proficiency, literacy in own language, and years living in Australia), and focusing on 10 specific language groups (more detail provided in our community summaries) (Appendix 3), this study provides a more nuanced understanding of the sample, providing more practical avenues of action to support these communities. This is in stark contrast to many studies which are only able to provide data on e.g. language spoke at home or years living in Australia, including our own previous work (McCaffery et al., 2020). Further work could explore experiences within a single language or culture to provide even more specific practical avenues of action. The limitations of the study are that recruitment for some language groups was lower than anticipated (n<50). For these language groups, estimates may be less reliable. In addition, using a relatively simple knowledge measure, we observed high levels of knowledge and self-reported COVID-19 prevention behaviors, and this may have limited our ability to identify important predictors of these outcomes. Future work could consider more d...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265322: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Serum samples were analysed for SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies (ECLIA, Roche).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgM</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: Paediatric patients were recruited only from three regions (counties) in Western Germany and not all paediatric practices in the area participated. In addition, initially low seroprevalence rates could have introduced a bias. Genetic risk factors could predispose certain populations to infections with SARS-CoV-2, which was not considered in this study. The proportion of children from Turkish families, in contrast to those of other origins, was lower than expected at 9% (see table 1), whereas ca. 20% of the families in the regions studied are of Turkish origin. However, this rather indicates an underestimation of the true infection rate in this group. Another limitation might be the use of surrogate parameters for the assessment of living conditions and income like number of rooms etc. Different educational grades might have posed difficulties in answering questions about educational status and might have also led to an underestimation of the corresponding risk factor. We attempted to reduce a possible bias through semi structured interviews to validate the answers drawn from the internet-based questionnaire.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.17.21265058: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The trial was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, International Council for Harmonization of Good Clinical Practice guidelines and all applicable regulatory requirements including oversight by a local institutional review board for each trial center.<br>Consent: All subjects provided written informed consent before participating in the trial.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Oral Epithelial Tissue Model: Primary oral mucosal tissues derived from human buccal epithelial cells (EpiOral™ ORL-200, MatTek Corporation – 40 year old Caucasian male tissue donor) were cultured for 28 days in transwell inserts as described previously.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Early Feasibility Clinical Study Design: This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, early feasibility study was conducted in the outpatient setting at two centers in the United States.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The subjects, investigators, site personnel, and EmitBio employees who were involved in collecting and analyzing data were unaware of the treatment-group assignments.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Gene Expression Analysis: To assess the immunomodulatory effects of 425 nm light on oral epithelial tissues, un-infected ORL-200 transwell cultures were illuminated with a single dose of 425 nm light (0 J/cm2, 3 J/cm2, 7.5 J/cm2, 15 J/cm2, 30 J/cm2, or 60 J/cm2) and incubated at 37°C, 5% CO2.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Gene Expression Analysis</div><div>suggested: (gene Expression Analysis Resource, RRID:SCR_017467)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analyses were performed with SAS software, version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc.).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS</div><div>suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS Institute</div><div>suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04662671</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Completed</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Phase I/II Randomized, Dose Escalation Study to Evaluate the…</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04557826</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Completed</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Acute Safety and Acceptability Study of Experimental Device …</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265412: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the University of Cape Town Research Ethics Committee (HREC 460/2020).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has several limitations. First, we could only include cases tested on the Seegene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV assay, excluding cases diagnosed by other PCR methods or antigen testing. However, the included cases are mostly representative of all diagnosed PCR cases in the Western Cape (Appendix Table 1). Second, while RTD is a reliable proxy marker for Delta, it is not as accurate as whole genome sequencing, and misclassification may have diluted the effect of Delta. Third, we could only assess the effect of prior laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection and seroprevalence studies suggest considerably higher numbers were infected, even after the first wave, and that prior infection prevalence differed by sub-district of residence (12). While we did adjust for sub-district, the absence of a protective effect of prior infection in the first wave may be due to insufficient numbers of those infections being diagnosed. Finally, although we adjusted for COVID-19 hospital admissions to account for escalating service pressure during the wave surge, we could not adjust for non-COVID-19 admissions that might have added to pressure on facilities and contributed to mortality.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265447: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A total of 1,002 completed responses was obtained, of which 53% were from women and 47% from men.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The ordering of the statements in the involvement, attitude, and belief scales was randomised to avoid bias in responses.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analyses were conducted using the ‘cluster’ and ‘regression’ commands in SPSS [39].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265421: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      Some limitations of the modeling framework presented in this paper includes modeling vaccination as a single dose despite the fact that majority of the COVID-19 vaccines available today require more than one does to get a good level of protection. In addition, our model assumes that vaccine efficacy is the same, either one is getting the vaccine for the first time or one had already experienced waning of immunity. This may not be the case in reality as getting the vaccine the second time may lead to a better/stronger protection. Also the efficacy of the vaccines for different variants of COVID-19 may be different. Another limitation of our model is assuming that the population is well-mixed. This may not be so in reality as contact rates and mixing patterns may vary between individuals depending on their age and activity level. We would also like to include lack of stochasticity as a limitation to our modeling framework. Despite all these limitations, we believe that our modeling framework has provided some insights into the endemic dynamics of COVID-19 and has also provided some reasonable suggestions on the important parameters to be considered to effective eradicate the disease.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.24.21265344: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In terms of types of studies, we included randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and editorial were included.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Search Strategy: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from December 1st, 2019, to September 1st, 2021, using predetermined search terms (Supplementary file table 1).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MEDLINE</div><div>suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Embase</div><div>suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials</div><div>suggested: (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, RRID:SCR_006576)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Furthermore, Google scholar was also searched for unindexed studies.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Google scholar</div><div>suggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3.5 (The Cochrane Collaboration).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>RevMan</div><div>suggested: (RevMan, RRID:SCR_003581)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Cochrane Collaboration</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Inclusion of good quality studies with detailed extraction of data, and rigorous evaluation of study quality lend great credibility and strength to our systematic review and meta-analysis Our study limitations include the observational nature of included studies with risk of confounding and selection bias. Furthermore, patient level data were lacking, and insufficient data is available to stratify patients by different factors, including age, disease activity, and socio-economic assessments of the patients. Additional research is needed to ascertain which risk factors play significant roles in causing COVID-19 related hospitalization. Finally, the majority of patients included in our study were extracted from the SECURE-IBD database. One disadvantage of this database is that it may be subject to reporting bias, which means that physicians tend to document severe cases, while the milder cases may remain underreported. Additional research is needed to further evaluate causality between the use of biologic therapies and COVID-19 outcomes. In conclusion, Regarding COVID-19 related hospitalization in IBD, Anti-TNFs and ustekinumab were associated with favorable outcomes. In addition, vedolizumab and tofacitinib were not associated with COVID-19 related hospitalization.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04425538</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Completed</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A Phase 2 Trial of Infliximab in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (C…</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265415: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265396: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      There are several notable limitations to this model. First, staff are not the only source of infection, as there are other potential sources of importation into the facility including: intake of new residents, visitation, facility movement, and work programs where residents leave the facility during the day. Second, the exclusion of notable COVID-19 prevention strategies (e.g. universal masking, physical distancing, proper ventilation) and of additional testing due to symptoms or known contacts is a limitation of our model. However, if additional control interventions were implemented, we expect qualitative trends in the expected number of transmission events to persist between testing strategies and frequencies across different transmission scenarios. Third, we do not distinguish between staff-to-staff and staff-to-resident transmission events within a simulated facility, but rather record the total number of transmission events assuming ℛ remains constant rather than decreasing due to susceptible depletion. Estimation of staff-staff and staff-resident contact rates or reproduction numbers would enable more precise accounting and simulation of importation events and subsequent transmission within a facility. Fourth, we assume that the probability density function of the triangle distribution is an accurate representation of SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics and therefore infectiousness through time. Though this function captures the general viral dynamics profile seen previously (19...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265390: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All analyses were conducted using RStudio with R version 4.1.0 (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>RStudio</div><div>suggested: (RStudio, RRID:SCR_000432)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      While our findings may be viewed as reassuring regarding bias in COVID-19 test-negative VE studies, these results are subject to several important limitations. First, we caution that our simulations examine bias scenarios we considered likely in the general population based on empiric U.S. data; however, we did not explore plausible scenarios by subpopulation. It is possible that some subpopulations, such as older persons or persons who are at higher risk of severe disease, may have a higher conditional probability of COVID-19 vaccination, given influenza vaccination status; this difference could thus, cause greater bias than we observed in our estimates. Similarly, regional variation in COVID-19 and influenza vaccination coverage may also affect the conditional probability of vaccination. Currently, lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in some southern U.S. states more closely aligns with influenza vaccination coverage in these regions.16, 17 These differences may also increase the conditional probability of vaccination, and thus, represent a setting where greater bias in COVID-19 VE estimates can occur. Both examples demonstrate that bias in VE estimates may be differential by subpopulation, which may be important for the interpretation of VE results. Additionally, even where the conditional probability of vaccination is the same, we found that bias can vary by true VE. In the case of COVID-19, where true VE is likely to vary by vaccine product,4, 20 bias in VE estimates wi...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265316: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The stratification of data in this study was done by splitting the data using the epidemic period variable in the IBM SPSS STATISTICS 27 Software. 2.2 Regression of South African COVID-19 Epidemiological Data: In an epidemic, several factors influence the outcome of the observed epidemic.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265349: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics statement: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Alberto C Taquini Institute for Translational Medicine Research of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Buenos Aires.<br>Consent: For the effectiveness study, based on the measurement of antibodies, informed consent was requested.<br>Field Sample Permit: The analysis was carried out with software R version 4.0.3 Funding source: The COVIDAR group provided the Serokits for sampling and the ELISA COVIDAR IgG kits, supported by FOCEM and Asoc. SAND. None of the funding sources provided economical support for the data collection, statistical analysis, or were used to write the manuscript, or to submit it for publication.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For the effectiveness objective considering the publication of the published phase 1/2 results of the Sputnik V vaccine study(2) and assuming that the vaccinated population in Buenos Aires will have the same behavior as published, the following sample scenarios were evaluated: a) For a delta of IgG antibody titers between 0 and 21 days of 1.24 with a standard deviation of 1 with a power of 90% and an alpha of 0.01, for a two-tailed hypothesis test.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data referring to the effectiveness was the measurement of antibodies type immunoglobulin G (IgG) against SARS-Cov-2.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-Cov-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04944433</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Active, not recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Safety and Efficacy of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine …</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265354: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The JACSIS study consisted of 3 surveys with the following targets: general population (N = 28,000), pregnant and postpartum women (N = 1,000), and single mothers/fathers (N = 1,000).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Four thousand three hundred seventy-three women who had given birth later than October 2019 or were expected to give birth by March 2021 were recruited from 21,896 eligible samples using simple random sampling.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 27.0 for Windows (IBM, Japan).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265371: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Statistical analyses were conducted using R version 4.0.2.[18] Ethics Statement: This study was approved by the Faculty of Health and Medicine Ethics Committee at Lancaster University (reference FHMREC19135).<br>Consent: Participation in the study was voluntary, with each participant (and where appropriate parent or guardian) giving their consent before proceeding.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265340: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board in University of South Carolina and relevant SC state agencies.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Covariates: Demographic characteristics included age at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis (18-49, ≥50), sex (female, male, and unknown), race (White, Black of African American, Asian, and other/unknown), and ethnicity (Hispanic or Latino, not Hispanic or Latino, and unknown).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All the analyses were done with SAS, version 9.4.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS</div><div>suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 findings need to be interpreted with caution due to the following limitations: First, our mental health data comes from a health utilization dataset. Therefore, we were not able to retrieve information of people who had mental disorders but failed to access to healthcare system due to any individual or structural level barriers. There is also missing information in the COVID-19 data. The missing data may impede the robustness of our findings. Second, the study is subject to common limitations of using ICD10 code to define mental health conditions. As other EHR based studies suggest, the quality of raw data may influence the validity of our results. Finally, we did not differentiate the severity category of the mental disorders within the same cluster. For example, we did not explore if patients with “acute” disorders have any different risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes compared to those with “recurrent” (more severe mental illness) disorders. Despite these limitations, the current study sheds lights on impacts of different clusters of mental disorders on COVID-19 clinical outcomes and the risk of presenting severe COVID-19 clinical outcomes among patients with co-occurrence of multiple clusters of mental disorders using a large statewide and real-world dataset. Our findings have significant implications for improving surveillance and triage in COVID-19 treatment considering that a high prevalence of psychiatric disorders (20.6% as of 2019) exists in the general population (...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265158: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: & RUDY LREC 17/SC/0501), an established online rare disease platform with online dynamic consent and patient reported data11. Recruitment: To ensure reaching our recruitment target rapidly, multiple pathways for recruitment were employed.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">immunomodulatory drugs - thalidomide, lenalidomide, pomalidomide; anti-CD38 antibody (daratumumab, Isatuximab); and anti-BCMA targeted treatment – (belantamab),</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-CD38</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-BCMA</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Laboratory assessments: Collected serum samples were tested for antibodies against SARS-CoV2 nucleocapsid (N) or spike (S) protein.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV2 nucleocapsid ( N</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV2 N protein antibodies were measured by turbidimetry (Abbott), with samples that produced values of >1.4IU/ml considered to be positive.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV2 N protein</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV2 S protein antibodies were measured by turbidimetry (Abbott) (IgG serology only), with a cut-off value of 50IU/ml considered to be a positive result.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV2 S protein</div><div>suggested: (PhosphoSolutions Cat# CoV2-5G8, RRID:AB_2868396)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We combined humoral and T cell outcomes responses to generate 4 independent groups: combined positive Anti-S antibody and IGRA reactivity compared with those with either Anti-S antibody or IGRA reactivity and those with double negative results.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-S</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV2 N protein antibodies were measured by turbidimetry (Abbott), with samples that produced values of >1.4IU/ml considered to be positive.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Abbott</div><div>suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      But a small proportion of patients (6%) are antibody and IGRA negative who require salvage strategies to Strengths and weaknesses of the study: The strength of the study is confirmation of an immune response in heterogeneously vaccinated patients with longer than recommended duration between first and second dose. Our humoral response results are comparable to data reported so far. We have generated a large dataset of T cell response alongside humoral response in myeloma patients. Our data has also been generated in a comparable demographic to the UK myeloma population. Studies use different platforms to generate both antibody and T cell results which makes direct comparability difficult. This dataset, although very reassuring, requires longitudinal follow up. Although further vaccine doses are planned for this patient population, attrition of immune response over time due to ongoing therapy or underlying disease is a concern. A major limitation of this study is the limited sample size of participants with poor humoral and T cell responses. Further, our study is limited by the missing data on chemotherapy and myeloma status from the clinical notes for all participants. We partially addressed this by adding self-reported myeloma status where clinical data were not required and when we compared using only clinical record data, the findings were similar. Therefore, further follow up to determine whether immune response wanes over time and whether use of particular therapies have...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265302: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: The study team obtained oral informed consent prior to interviews.<br>IACUC: The study was reviewed by the CDC ethics committee and approved as non-research.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265289: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Descriptive Analyses: All descriptive analyses were performed in R version 4.1.0 [17] using RStudio version 1.4.1103 [18].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>RStudio</div><div>suggested: (RStudio, RRID:SCR_000432)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The COVID-19 ZCTA-level hospitalization risks were directly age-standardized, in STATA version 16 [19], using the 2010 US population as the standard population.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>STATA</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: This study used both global and local models to investigate geographic disparities and identify predictors of COVID-19 hospitalization risks in St. Louis region of Missouri. The use of local models to investigate stationarity of regression coefficients of significant predictors and model non-stationary coefficients is a key strength of the study. This approach is particularly important in guiding local health planning since the importance of different predictors are not constant across the study area implying that different management and control strategies may need to be used in different areas. Therefore, modeling approaches that use both global and local models help to better understand the relationships between the outcome and predictors and may be more useful in guiding control efforts at the local level. However, the study is not without limitations. The hospital data has limitations associated with diagnostic classifications of COVID-19 in situations when the patient has co-morbidities that may have contributed to hospitalization. Additionally, there may be geographic differences in COVID-19 case ascertainment and reporting.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265339: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: According to 45 Code of Federal Regulations part 46 from the US Department of Health and Human Services, this study was deemed exempt from institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee approval.<br>Consent: We adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki, and informed consent was not required.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In addition, because finite statistical power increases the likelihood of type 2 errors, we further consider a “worst case” scenario for Ad26.COV2.S based on the upper confidence bound, which is a conservative approach since statistical imprecision implicitly “counts against” Ad26.COV2.S under this approach.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Immunoglobulin G (IgG) was measured using an indirect chemiluminescence immunoassay for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies (Diazyme Laboratories, Inc), which detects antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid proteins.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We previously used this assay for research purposes due to its selectivity for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and low-levels of cross-reactivity to other coronaviruses or influenza viruses.9, 10 IgM levels were not measured based on pilot data demonstrating that measured IgM response was implausibly low in this population (<20% positive even in the 28-day period following documented SARS-CoV-2 infection).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      The study should be viewed in light of the following limitations. As with any observational study, there is the possibility of residual confounding and bias (e.g., misclassification of exposure status for patients reporting vaccinations outside of the clinic). Data limitations precluded the ability to study COVID-19-related hospitalizations as we well as severity of illness and asymptomatic infections, or to study side effects of vaccines. Low case counts also precluded study of case fatality. Given the fluctuating nature of background COVID-19 rates in the US population over the course of follow-up, COVID-19 rates within an exposure group should not be compared across follow-up periods, but rather limited to within period comparisons across exposure groups. Finally, we could not compare the effectiveness of these vaccines against specific SARS-CoV-2 variants. In summary, our results demonstrate equivalent effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S to an mRNA-based vaccine (BNT162b2) in dialysis patients. These results support the continued use of Ad26.COV2.S as a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine option in this vulnerable population.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21264941: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical approval was obtained from University of Glasgow MVLS College Ethics Committee (20019174) and LSHTM Research Ethics committee (22565).<br>Consent: Informed consent to participate was sought and recorded prior to interview.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Women were oversampled to reflect their higher use of SRH services.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      Strength and limitations: We purposively interviewed participants who had tried but failed to access services. Quota-sampling from a quasi-representative population survey permitted us to include experiences from participants who varied by age, gender, ethnicity, and region. Although our enquiry followed a holistic framework of SRH, we were limited to issues experienced by our participants; services not covered included abortion and sexual assault services. Our study was unable to explore in depth the impacts of delayed access to specific services. Given the time between reporting of help-seeking and interview, we could not exclude potential for recall bias. This study aimed to highlight challenges, and participants were recruited accordingly. Thus, results likely underrepresent positive experiences, such as professional staff’s enormous efforts during this challenging time. Given participants’ digital recruitment, we may not have captured experiences of those without access to remote services, for example, due to language barriers, learning difficulties, or socio-economic factors. Finally, as with all qualitative research, our study draws on a small sample to capture a range of experiences of SRH access; it is not intended to be generalized or quantified.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265086: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Most of the samples were collected randomly from different cities in Iran through the help of the Iranian Network for Research in Viral Diseases (INRVD) or from private laboratories.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Initially, FASTQ files were assessed by FastQC (Andrews 2010) and then processed and compared with two in-house pipelines simultaneously.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FastQC</div><div>suggested: (FastQC, RRID:SCR_014583)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Fastp (Chen et al. 2018) and Cutadapt (Martin 2011) programs were applied for FASTQ pre-processing, followed by alignment to the NC_045512.2 using Bowtie2 (Langmead and Salzberg 2012) or Burrows-Wheeler Aligners (Li and Durbin 2009), keeping the high-quality reads mapped in proper pair.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Bowtie2</div><div>suggested: (Bowtie 2, RRID:SCR_016368)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The filtered BAM files were used for assembly of consensus SARS-CoV-2 sequences with Samtools mpileup and Bcftools (Li et al. 2009).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Samtools</div><div>suggested: (SAMTOOLS, RRID:SCR_002105)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265401: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265309: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Each study participant of the seroprevalence survey provided written informed consent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All COVID-19 cases included in the outbreak investigation were confirmed by RT-PCR on naso-pharyngeal swab and followed by WGS using an unbiased high-throughput sequencing method (see Supplements eAppendix 2 for details).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>WGS</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">15 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA) and R version 4.0.4 (2021-02-15) (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study also presents some limitations, including 1) potential selection bias regarding the fact that not all LTCF employees participated in the seroprevalence survey; 2) information and potential recall bias given the retrospective data collection; 3) the fact that contact with an asymptomatic COVID-19 case (community or hospital) may have not been recorded; 4) different populations in the two sets of analysis; 5) lack of power given the small sample size and number of events observed. Finally, despite a non-statistically significant result, and the possibility of residual confounding, the 95%CI of the influence of community on LTCF employees seropositivity clearly indicates a probable exposure effect, which is supported by seroprevalence survey at baseline and detailed genomic analysis. In conclusion, these two complementary approaches demonstrate a substantial contribution of both occupational and community exposures to seropositivity and infection risk. The role of HCWs in preventing importation of SARS-CoV-2 to LTCFs from the community is crucial. These data may not only allow to better assess occupational health hazards and related legal implications during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, but also emphasize the urgent need to maximise vaccine uptake in LTCF HCWs in order to limit HCW-to-HCW and HCW-to-patient transmission.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.23.21265429: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: 2.1 Study Design and population: This study was conducted at a tertiary care centre in Ontario, Canada, after approval by the institutional Research Ethics Board.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 testing: Serology and NAAT testing were performed in independent laboratories in a blinded fashion.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All analyses were conducted using SPSS 22.0 software (IBM Corp.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Armonk NY, USA) and MedCalc Statistical Software version 19.2.6</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MedCalc</div><div>suggested: (MedCalc, RRID:SCR_015044)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      These limitations are particularly important in resource-constrained settings. Over 18 months since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, as cases of COVID-19 continue to spread worldwide there remains a strong need for rapid, readily available diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this study, our findings suggest that by lowering the manufacturers’ recommended cut-off values for commercially available anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies serology we can accurately predict negative NAAT testing. In our population we would have had 77.4% (95% CI 72.5-81.7) of the samples categorized as highly likely to be negative by NAAT testing. Based on this data, we propose a ‘serology-first’ diagnostic algorithm that can be used to rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated symptomatic patients presenting to the ED. This serology-based diagnostic algorithm offers a lower cost alternative to universal NAAT testing, in addition to rapid turnaround times to enable efficient triage, clinical management and infection control. Such an algorithm could be used to facilitate more judicious use of NAAT-based testing, contributing to more effective utilization of hospital resources, minimize healthcare worker exposure risk and nosocomial spread. These findings could have significant implications for the diagnosis and management of SARS-CoV-2 infection in acute care settings. The high NPV of the serologic testing would not only reduce the need for NAAT testing but could allow early identification of...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21265368: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Covariates: The following covariates were adjusted for and/or used to stratify estimates: sex (male; female); age (coded in 10-year bands to account for non-linear relationships: 16-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75+); ethnicity (self-reported and coded for main analyses; as White-including white ethnic minorities vs.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: Mental Health: Mental health was measured both before the pandemic (a range of 0-7 years prior) and at multiple time-points across the pandemic using validated continuous scales measuring symptoms of common mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety (Table 1 outlines the specific measures used for each cohort).</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All meta-analyses and meta-regressions were conducted using Stata 17 (StataCorp LP).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Despite these advantages, methodological limitations should be noted. We cannot definitively attribute changes in population mental health to the COVID-19 pandemic or related policy responses. However, we note that we are unaware of alternate events which would have been likely to substantially confound our analyses or their interpretation. There were differences in the timing of data collection (including when pre-pandemic measures were collected) and the mental health survey instruments used, though this did not appear to significantly contribute to the high levels of statistical heterogeneity observed. Similarly, although weighting was used where possible to control for non-random response, conditioning on voluntary response may induce selection bias, as it is very plausible that the mental health of the observed differ systematically from the target population. However, the broad consistency in the direction of findings across datasets provides reassurance that the key conclusions are likely to be robust to these differences, even if the magnitude of the effect size is harder to confirm. In conclusion, mental health has been persistently worse than before the pandemic, particularly among women, those with higher degrees, and 25–44-year-olds. The sustained deterioration, even during easing of lockdown measures, somewhat refutes the notion that easing lockdown measures necessarily leads to better mental health, and implies that there are myriad pathways leading to adverse m...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265272: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical considerations: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of [blinded for review] University (approval no.: 1041078-202103-HRBM-080-01).<br>Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethical considerations: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of [blinded for review] University (approval no.: 1041078-202103-HRBM-080-01).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Using the G-power version 3.1.9.7 program, with significance level (α) .05, power (1-β) .95, and effect size (r) .</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Using the G-power version 3.1.9.7 program, with significance level (α) .05, power (1-β) .95, and effect size (r) .</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>G-power</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data analysis: The collected data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics 25.0 program.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has some limitations. First, since this study was conducted through an online survey, it is necessary to be careful about generalizing the findings as there may be a selection bias of users who use the Internet. Second, due to the lack of prior research, only sociodemographic characteristics were analyzed to explain nurses’ duty to care. However, this study is the first to quantitatively analyze Korean nurses’ duty to care, using the translated version of NDCS. Therefore, findings from this study may be used as basic data for related studies in the future. Moreover, this study included nurses practicing in the clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is meaningful in that it served as an opportunity to understand duty to care of nurses close to the clinical field.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265318: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      The work presented here has some limitations. First, we do not account for population heterogeneity beyond 10-year age groups; therefore, we do not account for additional sources of heterogeneity such as individuals with differing levels of risk (due to factors other than age, e.g., co-morbidities) and geographic clustering in vaccination coverage or naturally-acquired immunity. Therefore, these results represent the average impacts of vaccinating adolescents in the population, but precise benefits may vary in subgroups of the population. Second, we assume that once individuals recover from infection, they cannot be re-infected. There is evidence that re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 [65] may be possible; therefore, we may be underestimating the number of infections. We also assume a final vaccination coverage of 75% in children and adolescents, which is consistent with the percent of adolescents willing to be vaccinated in The Netherlands [66]; however, this may be optimistic. If true vaccination coverage in children and adolescents is lower, then the impacts of vaccinating these groups will also be lower. Finally, we assume there is no change in the probability of severe disease upon infection over time or between variants. There is evidence that suggests increased disease severity after infection with the Delta variant [67]; therefore, we may be underestimating the number of severe infections. In conclusion, our results highlight the benefits to extending COVID-19 vaccination ...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.21264701: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Participants aged 12 to 85 years inclusive were randomly selected from the Second Generation Surveillance System (SGSS; the routine laboratory reporting system in England [7]) to be proportionately representative by geographical region in England (East Midlands, East of England, London, North East, North West, South East, South West, West Midlands, Yorkshire and The Humber) from all those who requested a test through community testing with a specimen date of 26-27 November 2020.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">During the study design phase in spring/summer 2020, we estimated the sample size required with 300-350 cases to detect a difference with 80% power at a significance level of 5% and assuming a difference of half a quality-adjusted life-day (QALD) lost by laboratory-confirmed cases.</td></tr></table>

      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: This study is one of the first to provide long-term QALY estimates associated with non-hospitalised COVID-19 in the UK, which will be of use in evaluation studies of vaccines, drugs, and non-pharmaceutical interventions. We also recruited a control group for the cross-sectional analysis, which is not often available in other studies. As cases were recruited after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, they completed versions of the EQ-5D three times in the initial survey, including retrospectively about their pre-COVID-19 baseline health. Such a design is common, and while this may introduce recall bias most cases in our sample reported symptom onset within 2 weeks of having been tested and thus completed the initial survey within 4 weeks. For controls, the survey was sent by email to reduce the administrative burden and costs, which we tried to compensate for by inviting a larger sample. For the cases, we found some indication that the retainment of participants with worse health may be higher in those who return surveys by post (which we accounted for in the models). Although all respondents were randomly sampled and we applied post-hoc weighting by age group and sex for more representative results, we also cannot rule out self-selection bias into this study by more health-conscious individuals. We also provided results for both utility value sets in England of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L given that mapping from the responses on the EQ-5D-5L to the EQ-5D-...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265107: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265284: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      Although our study provides the most precise measure to date of the effect of COVID-19 in cancer patients, it suffers from some limitations. Many studies included in our analysis did not provide results adjusted for important determinants such as sex, age, comorbidities, and therapy. As mentioned above, we were not able to analyse specific cancers other than hematologic neoplasms, because results were too sparse. In conclusion our meta-analysis confirms, by giving a more precise and accurate estimation, evidence to the hypothesis of an association between all type of cancer (and more specific hematologic neoplasm) and a worst outcome on Mortality, ICU admission and Severity of COVID-19. Future studies will be able to better analyse this association for the different subtypes of cancer too. Furthermore, they will eventually be able to evaluate whether the difference among vaccinated population is reduced.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265314: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethics: Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Hong Kong/ Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster (UW 21-149 and UW 21-138); and the Department of Health Ethics Committee (LM 21/2021).<br>Consent: Patient identification was anonymized from HA and DH databases and patient consent was not required.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Outcome measures: We assessed the incidence of hospital admission related to a spectrum of 16 pre-specified AID, grouped by body systems including: 1) immune-mediated cardiovascular diseases (Kawasaki disease, single organ cutaneous vasculitis); 2) organ specific immune-mediated endocrine disorder (subacute thyroiditis); 3) immune-mediated hematological diseases (anti-phospholipid antibody syndrome, idiopathic thrombocytopenia); 4) immune-mediated multisystem diseases (Sjogren syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus); 5) immune-mediated musculoskeletal diseases (acute aseptic arthritis, reactive arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, spondyloarthritis); and 6) immune-mediated neurological disorders (acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, narcolepsy and related disorders, and transverse myelitis).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-phospholipid</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      There are also limitations in this study. Due to limited data sources, our case definition was restricted to autoimmune conditions that were severe enough to warrant hospitalization and inpatient care. Mild, self-limiting autoimmune conditions not requiring inpatient treatment are beyond the scope of this study. Similarly, our EMRs database does not include health information from the private sector, and information on other vaccination which may cause such diseases. Finally, case identification largely depended on ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes, which could cast some uncertainty on coding practices and affirmative diagnosis. However, previous studies using the EMRs database from the HA showed high coding accuracy16-19 and our additional analyses using both primary and secondary diagnosis would minimize this risk.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265313: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved in accordance with the agreed procedure with the Ethics Committee of Peking University Third Hospital, waiving written informed consent for deidentified patient data.<br>Consent: The study was approved in accordance with the agreed procedure with the Ethics Committee of Peking University Third Hospital, waiving written informed consent for deidentified patient data.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Thus, ‘cases’ were defined as pregnant COVID-19 patients.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">6 Each pregnant patient was matched to a confirmed patient who was non pregnant, with same age and admitted in same hospital as ‘control’ by simple randomization.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      It is also worth noting that the findings of the present study are subject to limitation of missing data. We can hardly rule out the existence of missed case due to the pregnant COVID-19 cases were identified based on the uploaded medical records. However, we undertook a meticulous process in reviewing previous literatures and then believed that the present study had the capability to capture a national picture of the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy. Additionally, given the variation in the clinical process of diagnosis and treatment and the electronic medical records databases among the designated hospitals, some cases had missing values in the laboratory testing. It may lead to misestimation of some characteristics if those with missing data were systematically different from those with available data. Further, collection and comparation of longitudinal data for pregnant women with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the outbreak is needed to understand the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on maternal and neonatal outcomes. In summary, compared with nonpregnant COVID-19 patients, being pregnant did not represent a risk for severe condition. Moreover, patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in early pregnancy were at lower risk of severe illness than those infected in late pregnancy.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265216: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265295: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Participants were eligible to enroll if they provided informed consent in English or Spanish, and had not received a previous diagnosis of COVID-19 or positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection (molecular, antigen, or serological test).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Each day, interviewers called participants selected at random from all individuals with test results reported in the preceding 48 hours.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 study included the potential for symptoms reporting to vary among participants, and the possibility that participants may have been pre-symptomatic at the time of their interview/response. In addition, bias may have occurred if individuals’ decision to wear masks was associated with their likelihood of seeking testing when asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic. Direct measurement of SARS-CoV-2 exposure intensity and clinical status was not possible under this design. However, based on our observations, real-world effects of masking and other non-pharmaceutical mitigation measures may have greater impact on individuals’ risk of infection than their likelihood of experiencing symptoms, once infected. Studies in animal models have likewise provided inconsistent support for the hypothesis that reducing SARS-CoV-2 exposure dose may lower the risk of severe disease, given infection [26]. Additional factors which may have modified the likelihood of transmission during high-risk exposure could include the vaccination status of infected contacts [30], the type of masks or face coverings used [31], the physical distance individuals maintained while interacting, and ventilation of indoor spaces where interactions occurred. Obtaining reliable information on these details of each interaction was not feasible through retrospective interviews with participants. While our sample size was under-powered to distinguish between protection associated with masking by participant...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265299: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: 2.1 Study design: This study involved a self–report cross-sectional survey with 11 language groups, approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.6 Quantitative analysis: Quantitative data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 26.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: This study is novel in its use of both Content Analysis and quantitative analysis to determine if any positive outcomes are to be found in the experiences of a sample of culturally and linguistically diverse people resident in Sydney, New South Wales. It is the largest Australian survey which explores the impacts of COVID–19 for people who speak a language other than English at home. However, it is important to consider that this investigation into “positives” experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is dependent upon a single survey item administered during a specific and short time—March 21st to July 9th, 2021 when COVID-19 case numbers were low in Australia. Our previous research from June 2020 reports on a time in which most of Australia was leaving strict restrictions, but in our current study case numbers and restrictions were heading in the opposite direction; this may have been reflected in the much lower rate of positives found in this study amongst these communities. It is unknown how the repercussions of lockdown, restrictions and higher risk of COVID-19 may have influenced culturally and linguistically diverse community members in terms of finding positives. It is possible that even fewer participants would have reported positives with continued lockdown, particularly as the communities which we surveyed faced tighter restrictions than the rest of Sydney as the weeks after the survey progressed, including curfews, limits on outdoor exerc...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265293: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Although our results do not indicate that the rise of the Alpha variant over the study period changed the risk associated with in-person schooling, there were some unexpected patterns in the interaction between full-time schooling and variant prevalence, which may reflect a limitation of the data. As the prevalence of the Alpha variant was increasing in all states over the study period, as well as within each time strata we investigated, some of this effect may be due to other time-varying factors that are not captured in the data such as changing compliance with intervention measures. Additionally, data on variant prevalence was only available at the state-level, which may obscure important county-level differences. This study has several additional limitations. The survey data that informed the risk estimates were self-reported and subject to recall bias. They were also gathered through the Facebook platform and may not be representative of the underlying populations, though this should be accounted for at least in part through the survey weights (19). We found that vaccination rates were higher in the survey data compared to CDC’s reported data (15) (Fig. S1). While CDC’s reported vaccination data is known to be under-reported, this could also reflect a bias in the survey data (20). For example, the US CTIS survey may be capturing a more affluent, less rural population, which could explain in part why we found particularly large differences in the survey data compared to C...

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21264686: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Weaknesses include the lack of detailed data on the causes of death, which would have allowed insights into the sources of the observed variation in excess deaths. Several previous studies reported nationwide excess mortality for 2020. The Office for National Statistics in England reported a 17.9% increase in male mortality and 11.2% in females [11]. A recent study of 40 industrialised countries covered the period from February 2020 to February 2021 and found an excess mortality of 15% to 20% in England and Wales, Spain and Italy [20]. Our estimates are lower but credibility intervals include the figures from both studies. Reasons for the discrepancies include the different periods used to train the model, different data sources, different prediction periods and the exclusion of Wales from our data [21]. Our results are in line with estimates from the Hellenic Statistical Authority, which reported a 7.3% increase in the relative excess in Greece during 2020 [10], a Swiss study reporting a 10.6% increase in excess mortality in males and a 7.2% increases in females relative to 2019 [22] and the estimates from the Italian National Institute of Statistics [23]. The latter reported a 15.6% excess for 2020 compared to the average number of deaths 2015 to 2019 [23]. In Spain, the relative excess mortality varied from 26.8% to 77.9% across the different age groups for the period March to May 2020 and from 10.0% to 18.9% during the period July to December 2020 [24]. At the regional le...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265288: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: All protocols were reviewed and approved by each site’s Institutional Review Boards; study participants provided informed consent for all study activities.<br>Consent: All protocols were reviewed and approved by each site’s Institutional Review Boards; study participants provided informed consent for all study activities.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Participants were categorized as having had a SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to Follow-up survey 1 if they reported detection by antibody, antigen, or RT-PCR assay prior to enrollment, or if SARS-CoV-2 was detected by RT-PCR or an antibody test during the study.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>antigen,</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Study Design & Population: The HEROES-RECOVER studies represent a national network of prospective cohorts, including Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Response and Other Essential Workers Surveillance Study (HEROES) and Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response Personnel (RECOVER) funded by the CDC with sites in Phoenix, Tucson, and other areas in Arizona; Miami, Florida; Duluth, Minnesota; Portland, Oregon; Temple, Texas; and Salt Lake City, Utah. Details of the protocols of the studies have been previously published.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Arizona Healthcare</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Phoenix</div><div>suggested: (Phoenix, RRID:SCR_003163)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Vaccination was verified by participant-provided vaccine cards, electronic medical records, or State Immunization Information Systems.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>State Immunization Information Systems</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All statistical analyses were completed using R (version 4.0.4; R Foundation for Statistical Computing) and SAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAS Institute</div><div>suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: This study is subject to several limitations. First, the follow-up surveys were spread out over about six weeks due to site’s individual IRB timelines. As the level of information available evolved quickly during the study period, participants at sites where the follow-up surveys were administered later may have had access to a meaningfully different amount, or quality, of information. Secondly, all KAPs are self-reported and there may be a disconnect between perceived knowledge and actual level of knowledge. Next, while we are confident KAPs are successfully captured in our cohorts at the time of administration, due to the novelty of the COVID-19 vaccine, KAPs will likely continue to change and evolve past this analysis period. Finally, the mechanism prompting change in KAPs is not captured, so it is difficult to know why certain KAPs changed as they did over time, e.g., the change in certain KAPs between the two follow-up surveys may have been due to increased numbers of participants receiving the vaccine with few documented serious adverse event rates, increased access to information and disease/vaccine literacy, changes in national and local COVID-19 incidence. The demographic characteristics of the group that answered Follow-up 2 different slightly from those that completed Follow-up 1: there were more female participants (64% vs 60%), they were older (45% 40-65 years of age compared to 36%), and there were higher percentages of FW (36% vs 20%) and lower per...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265219: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265093: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.22.465272: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Modeller 10.1 molecular modelling suite was used to generate the new models based on the Wild-type RBD/ACE2 template [26].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Modeller</div><div>suggested: (MODELLER, RRID:SCR_008395)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">VMD and Pymol were used for visualization of the trajectories [33,34].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Pymol</div><div>suggested: (PyMOL, RRID:SCR_000305)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All the analyses were carried out using Gromacs tools [35]</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Gromacs</div><div>suggested: (GROMACS, RRID:SCR_014565)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 34. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.465254: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Later the cells were incubated with the secondary anti-Rabbit IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (Life Technologies, Cat. no.: A11008; Lot no.: 1735088) at the dilution of 1:200 in 1% BSA made in PBS. Rhodamine Phalloidin (Life Technologies, Cat. no.: R415; Lot no.: 1738179) was used to label F-actin.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-Rabbit IgG</div><div>suggested: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A-11008, RRID:AB_143165)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>F-actin</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">After the incubation, virus inoculum containing melittin & gramicidin S was added to the Vero cells in duplicates (50μl /well).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero</div><div>suggested: CLS Cat# 605372/p622_VERO, RRID:CVCL_0059)</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Network and pathway analysis of the associated proteins were performed using STRING v11.5</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>STRING</div><div>suggested: (STRING, RRID:SCR_005223)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The data analysis and graphs were generated using GraphPad Prism (Ver 8.4.2).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on pages 25 and 23. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.465252: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.1 Mice: Male and female BALB/c and K18-hACE2 mice (aged 6–10 weeks) were obtained from the HKU Laboratory Animal Unit</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.8 Surface and intracellular cytokine staining (ICS): The lung cells of mice were washed one time with staining buffer (PBS contained 2% FBS) followed by staining with anti-mouse antibodies for 30 min at 4 □, including dead cell dye (Zombie Aqua, Biolegend Cat# 423102), CD19-FITC (Biolegend Cat# 152404, RRID: AB_2629813), CD11b-PerCP/Cy5.5 (Biolegend Cat# 101228, RRID: AB_893232), CD11c-PE-Cy7 (Biolegend Cat# 117318, RRID: AB_493568), Ly6c-APC-Fire750 (BioLegend Cat# 128046, RRID: AB_2616731), F4/80-BV421 (Biolegend Cat# 123137, RRID: AB_2563102), Ly6G-PE (BioLegend Cat# 127608, RRID: AB_1186099), CD103-BV785 (Biolegend Cat# 121439, RRID: AB_2800588) and I-A/I-E-BV605 (Biolegend Cat# 107639, RRID: AB_2565894).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 127608, RRID:AB_1186099)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD19-FITC</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse antibodies</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 152404, RRID:AB_2629813)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD11b-PerCP/Cy5.5</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div></div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 101228, RRID:AB_893232)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD11c-PE-Cy7</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div></div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 117318, RRID:AB_493568)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Ly6c-APC-Fire750</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div></div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 128046, RRID:AB_2616731)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>F4/80-BV421</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div></div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 123137, RRID:AB_2563102)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Ly6G-PE</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD103-BV785</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div></div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 121439, RRID:AB_2800588)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>I-A/I-E-BV605</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>I-A/I-E-BV605</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 107639, RRID:AB_2565894)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">After overnight incubation, cells were washed with staining buffer (PBS containing 2% FBS) and surface stained with anti-mouse-CD4-PerCP/Cy5.5 (Biolegend Cat# 116012, RRID: AB_2563023), anti-mouse-CD8-BV785 (Biolegend Cat# 100750, RRID: AB_2562610)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>with anti-mouse-CD4-PerCP/Cy5.5</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 116012, RRID:AB_2563023)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse-CD8-BV785</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 100750, RRID:AB_2562610)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">, anti-mouse CD69-BV711 (Biolegend Cat# 104537, RRID: AB_2566120) and anti-mouse CD103-BV421 (Biolegend Cat# 121422, RRID: AB_2562901)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse CD69-BV711</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 104537, RRID:AB_2566120)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 121422, RRID:AB_2562901)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For intracellular staining, cells were fixed and permeabilized with BD Cytofix/Cytoperm (BD Biosciences) prior to staining with anti-mouse-IFN-γ-APC (Biolegend Cat# 505810, RRID: AB_315404), anti-mouse-TNF-α-PE (Biolegend Cat# 506306, RRID: AB_315427) and anti-mouse-IL-2-PE-Cy7 (Biolegend Cat# 503832, RRID: AB_2561750)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>with anti-mouse-IFN-γ-APC</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 505810, RRID:AB_315404)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse-TNF-α-PE</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 506306, RRID:AB_315427)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-mouse-IL-2-PE-Cy7</div><div>detected: (BioLegend Cat# 503832, RRID:AB_2561750)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For identification and localization of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (NP) in organ tissues, IF staining was performed on deparaffinized and rehydrated tissue sections using rabbit anti-SARS-CoV-2-N protein antibody together with AF568-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG (Invitrogen).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (NP</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2-N protein</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-rabbit IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">After blocking with 0.1% Sudan black B for 15 min and 1% bovine serum albumin (BSA)/PBS at RT for 30 min, the primary antibody rabbit anti-SARS-CoV-2-N antibody (1:4000 dilution with 1% BSA/PBS) was incubated at 4°C overnight.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-SARS-CoV-2-N</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.2 Cell lines: HEK 293T-hACE2 and Vero E6 cells (RRID:CVCL_0574) were maintained in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM) (Thermo Fisher Scientific) containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM L-glutamine and 100 U/mL penicillin and were incubated at 37□ in 5% CO2 setting (22). 2.3</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK 293T-hACE2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero E6</div><div>detected: (IZSLER Cat# BS CL 87, RRID:CVCL_0574)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Viruses: Confluent Vero-E6 cells were infected at 0.01 MOI with live SARS-CoV-2 HKU-13 strain (GenBank accession number MT835140).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero-E6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The plasmid DNA transfection into HEK 293T cells was performed using polyethylenimine (PEI), and protein expression was detected by Western blot.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK 293T</div><div>suggested: CCLV Cat# CCLV-RIE 1018, RRID:CVCL_0063)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To rescue the virus, eight pHW2000 plasmids containing the DelNS1-RBD and the other 7 influenza virus genomic segments, together with an NS1 expression plasmid, were transfected into 293T cells using Transit-LT1 (Mirus) according to the manufacturer protocol.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>293T</div><div>suggested: CCLV Cat# CCLV-RIE 1018, RRID:CVCL_0063)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Viruses were aliquoted and titrated by plaque assay using MDCK cells.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MDCK</div><div>suggested: CLS Cat# 602280/p823_MDCK_(NBL-2, RRID:CVCL_0422)</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Organisms/Strains</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.1 Mice: Male and female BALB/c and K18-hACE2 mice (aged 6–10 weeks) were obtained from the HKU Laboratory Animal Unit</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>K18-hACE2</div><div>suggested: RRID:IMSR_GPT:T037657)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The transduced BALB/c mice or K18-ACE2 transgenic mice were intranasally infected with live wild type SARS-CoV-2 (HKU clone 13) at a dose of 1×104 PFU.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BALB/c</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">vaccine: Codon-optimized SARS-CoV-2 RBD gene was in fusion to a human soluble PD1 domain (PD1-RBD) using the pVAX plasmid as the backbone.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pVAX</div><div>suggested: RRID:Addgene_141350)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The pHW2000-DelNS1-RBD plasmid was constructed by inserting the tPA-linked RBD between the noncoding region (NCR) and autoproteolytic cleavage site (2A) in the pHW2000-DelNS1 plasmid.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pHW2000-DelNS1-RBD</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pHW2000-DelNS1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To rescue the virus, eight pHW2000 plasmids containing the DelNS1-RBD and the other 7 influenza virus genomic segments, together with an NS1 expression plasmid, were transfected into 293T cells using Transit-LT1 (Mirus) according to the manufacturer protocol.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pHW2000</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In brief, different SARS-CoV-2 pseudotype viruses were generated through co-transfection of 293T cells with 2 plasmids, pSARS-CoV-2 S and pNL4-3Luc_Env_Vpr, carrying the optimized SARS-CoV-2 S gene and a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 backbone, respectively.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pNL4-3Luc_Env_Vpr</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Area under the curve (AUC) was measured using GraphPad Prism v8, setting the baseline with the defined endpoint (average of negative control wells + 10 standard deviation) and taking the total peak area as previous described (27).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For intracellular staining, cells were fixed and permeabilized with BD Cytofix/Cytoperm (BD Biosciences) prior to staining with anti-mouse-IFN-γ-APC (Biolegend Cat# 505810, RRID: AB_315404), anti-mouse-TNF-α-PE (Biolegend Cat# 506306, RRID: AB_315427) and anti-mouse-IL-2-PE-Cy7 (Biolegend Cat# 503832, RRID: AB_2561750)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BD Cytofix/Cytoperm</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Stained cells were acquired by FACSAriaIII Flow Cytometer (BD Biosciences) and analyzed with FlowJo software (v10.6) (BD Bioscience).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FlowJo</div><div>suggested: (FlowJo, RRID:SCR_008520)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All tissue sections were examined, the images were captured with a Carl Zeiss LSM780 confocal microscope, and the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) was further measured by ImageJ v1.53c.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>ImageJ</div><div>suggested: (ImageJ, RRID:SCR_003070)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">2.12 Statistical analysis: Statistical analysis was performed with the GraphPad Prism 8 Software.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      Although intramuscular electroporation delivery has potential limitation for DNA vaccination in large populations, this approach has demonstrated the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity profile for SARS-CoV-2 DNA vaccines in clinical trials (61). Future study, however, is needed to develop non-invasive delivery techniques for DNA vaccination in humans. In addition, simultaneous or sequential co-infection by SARS-CoV-2 and A(H1N1)pdm09 caused more severe disease than infection by either virus (62), our LAIV platform may offer an opportunity of generating a human vaccine to fight both COVID-19 and influenza.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04809389</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Active, not recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A Study to Evaluate Safety and Immunogenicity of DelNS1-nCoV…</td></tr></table>


      Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


      Results from JetFighter: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 30. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265115: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The University of California, San Diego Institutional Review Board (IRB) provided approval of the study conduct (IRB# 190699, Protocol #20-0006); informed consent was obtained for the collection of blood samples and de-identified use of the data.<br>Consent: The University of California, San Diego Institutional Review Board (IRB) provided approval of the study conduct (IRB# 190699, Protocol #20-0006); informed consent was obtained for the collection of blood samples and de-identified use of the data.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Polymorphprep™ was added to collected samples and centrifuged at 500g x 30 mins to separate plasma from white blood cells per manufacturer’s instructions (Progen) and transferred to new Eppendorf tubes and centrifuged at 3731 x g for 5 minutes to remove any cellular debris.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Polymorphprep™</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      There are some limitations of this study that need to be acknowledged. First, regarding the clinically (obtained from the patient record) derived data, the low sample size of the studied patient population and non-uniformity in the timing of some laboratory results hinders the ability to make stronger inferences than are made here; the robustness of the presented results would doubtlessly have been strengthened with a larger sample size and fewer missing data. However, even with this very limited sample size we were able to make some cautious conclusions as to new hypotheses of molecular mechanisms that might otherwise not be recognized with a larger patient population. Second, regarding data drop-out, this was a real-world observational study, and the clinical laboratory measurements and values reflect patient management of severely ill COVID+ patients in the ICU. Third, in our analytical protocol, the mass spectrometry approach was necessarily untargeted; if specific protein systems and products of their degradation were targeted, it is possible that the potential dysfunction in these systems (e.g., coagulation, complement, etc.) could be highlighted in greater detail. Finally, when comparing and integrating proteomics and peptidomics data, the availability of transcriptomics data, which were not part of the experimental design of this observational study, could add information on protein regulation, and help understand to a greater depth the impact of abnormal proteolysis ...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265042: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sampling: Combined naso- and oropharyngeal swabs were collected from 76 patients (46 males and 30 females, age ranging between 13 and 85 years) in Samawa, Iraq (31.3188° N, 45.2806° E) during the second epidemic wave of COVID-19 in Iraq (between December 27, 2020 and February 28, 2021).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Additionally, sequencing reads with low-quality (quality score <30) and short sequence (<50 nt) were removed using Trimmomatic [15], assembly using BWA-MEM [16], variant calling using LoFreq [17], and consensus calling using SAMtools [18] implemented in the HaVoC pipeline [19].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Trimmomatic</div><div>suggested: (Trimmomatic, RRID:SCR_011848)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BWA-MEM</div><div>suggested: (Sniffles, RRID:SCR_017619)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>LoFreq</div><div>suggested: (LoFreq, RRID:SCR_013054)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SAMtools</div><div>suggested: (SAMTOOLS, RRID:SCR_002105)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HaVoC</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Structural comparison was performed between the selected template and the built model to assign their similarity and dissimilarity using TM-align [24] and FATCAT web tools [25].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FATCAT</div><div>suggested: (FATCAT, RRID:SCR_014631)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Finally, the refined model structure was prepared for docking by adding polar hydrogen atoms and Gasteiger charges using the Autodock tool 1.5.6 [29].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Autodock</div><div>suggested: (AutoDock, RRID:SCR_012746)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Phylogenetic Tree: Genome sequence alignment was performed using alignment of multiple complete SARS-CoV-2 genomes (MAFFT online version April 11, 2020) [31].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MAFFT</div><div>suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The phylogenetic tree was mapped by a maximum likelihood estimation using a fit substitution model (ModelFinder) and replicate number with 1000 bootstrap on IQ-TREE (version: 1.6.10) [32] with ultrafast bootstrap support.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IQ-TREE</div><div>suggested: (IQ-TREE, RRID:SCR_017254)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21264954: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: One group of participants was invited to enroll in the study by a postal mailing and was given an online code to consent and complete a battery of online surveys and then a few days later participated in clinical testing.<br>IRB: Data collection: Data were collected from August 25 to September 1, 2021. 2.8. Ethics: The University of Louisville Institutional Review Board approved this project as Human Subjects Research (IRB number: 20.0393 and 15.1260).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Probability sampling: For the probability sample, households were contacted such that one adult within the household was randomly selected to participate.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For this work, only demographic, COVID-19 antibody status and wastewater monitoring community survey results are reported for a single wave of this serial testing. 2.1.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>COVID-19</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265193: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical approval was granted by Imperial College London’s Ethics Research Committee (Approval number: 20IC5956).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data analysis: Quantitative data were analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) v.27.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Statistical Package for the Social Sciences</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265175: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the research ethics committee of the CHU (University Hospital Center) de Québec-Université Laval and all participants gave oral or written informed consent before inclusion.<br>Consent: The study was approved by the research ethics committee of the CHU (University Hospital Center) de Québec-Université Laval and all participants gave oral or written informed consent before inclusion.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: In addition, PSRs were measured by validated indicators from the two main internationally recognized models, that is, Karasek and Theorell’s “demand-control-support” model and Siegrist’s “effort-reward imbalance” model [17,18].</td></tr></table>

      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:
      This study has also some limitations. As said earlier, an observational cross-sectional survey cannot conclude on a causal relationship between PSRs and work-related psychological distress, but our results are consistent with several published studies. Exposures and events were self-reported, but bias should be limited because the questions were derived from theoretical models that have been internationally recognized for many years and used in national surveys. We cannot rule out a selection bias related to the ∼40% response rate, but such a bias would most likely underestimate the rate of distress as individuals with high and very high psychological distress may feel too bad to respond to a questionnaire.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265194: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For the qualitative analysis one author (SG) randomly selected 200 GPs from the total 381 who posted tweets from February 2020.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21265168: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The python package XGBoost was used to construct the models, using 924 features in total.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265028: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IACUC: The study was approved by Institutional board review (IRB# 2020055421).<br>Consent: Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients included in the study.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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 had certain limitations. It is a single center, observational study which included relatively small number of symptomatic patients. However, since COVID-19 is a relatively new disease our aim was to include patients with comparable follow-up. Due to retrospective design, not all the patients were followed at the same regular intervals. Hence, there are some missing data points (not all the patients had imaging or PFT in all phases [acute, subacute, and chronic]). We cannot correlate the findings with underlying co-morbidities and clinical course as the sample size is small. Due to heterogeneous cohort, it will be difficult to determine which patients are more prone to developing small airway disease based on their clinical characteristics and illness course during acute infection. More longitudinal follow up studies including large number of patients can be done in future to delineate the risk factors and prevalence of fSAD in patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Also, studies are needed to understand the long-term consequences and treatment modalities in patients presenting with differing clinical and radiological phenotypes.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265133: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: The competent authority of the Federal State of Saxony, Germany approved the study protocol and declared waiver of informed consent (reference number: 31-5221.40-15/68).<br>IRB: The study was approved by the ethics committee of the TU Dresden (approval number: BO-EK (COVID)-482102021) and adheres to the Declaration of Helsinki and all relevant administrative and legal regulations.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Aggregation of outcomes into groups offers the advantage of higher statistical power, particularly in the case of post COVID-19, which is considered to include multiple rare symptoms and diagnoses [7,9,14].</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Authentication: Evidence synthesis: Since pooling of individual-level data was not possible due to data protection restrictions, the six health insurance datasets were analyzed separately by authorized institutes or the healthcare research department within the respective health insurance.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The POINTED consortium is coordinated by the Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare (ZEGV) at the TU Dresden and consists of large German statutory health insurances, health services research institutes (ZEGV and InGef - Institute for Applied Health Research Berlin), the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), and clinical experts.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Evidence-Based Healthcare</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: The main strength of our analysis is its broad database including more than 150,000 individuals with available data in the post COVID-19 phase. This unselected sample from all over Germany covers both outpatient and inpatient care and, thus, constitutes a unique and comprehensive source of evidence. The 96 outcomes considered in this study were selected based on published evidence and clinical expertise and provided a sound and sensitive basis for investigation of potential long-term sequelae of COVID-19 across multiple diagnosis/symptom complexes. Our analysis is based on documented, confirmed diagnoses made by physicians and psychotherapists. Accordingly, our results are not subject to possible distortions resulting from selective, incomplete, or inadequate self-reporting of symptoms but instead rely on information provided by medical professionals. To avoid confounding of the relationships between outcomes and exposure, we applied matching on relevant covariates, i.e. age, sex, and several prevalent medical conditions. The resulting distributions of covariates in the COVID-19 and control cohorts were similar, which indicated successful balancing. Overall, our results for adults are in accordance with those of previous, international studies based on routine health data [6,7,20,22]. This similarity suggests that external validity is high and provides indirect support for the validity of our findings for children and adolescents. Data preparation a...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT05074953</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Active, not recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Post-COVID-19 Monitoring in Routine Health Insurance Data</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.14.21264965: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      Our study has limitations. Since the REACT-1 study began in May 2020, we observed a gradual reduction in response rates from 30.5% in round 1 to 11.7% in round 13. However, in round 14, the response rate increased slightly to 12.2%. This increase, albeit small, is encouraging. It may be that further changes to the survey could further increase participation. The change to using wet swabs in saline solution and the collection of samples without the cold chain (by post or courier) may well have affected diagnostic sensitivity. We were reassured by the limited differences between the samples collected by post and courier. However, because the exact system used in previous rounds (dry swabs and a sustained cold chain) was not compared within a round, we could not estimate the impact of the new approaches compared to that used in previous rounds. A further limitation is that we do not have perfect data on the vaccination status of all participants. Although consent to data linkage was at a high level (87.5% in round 14) not all participants consent for linkage to their NHS records which include data from the COVID-19 immunization programme. For those who are not linked, data on the dates of vaccination and vaccine type are either missing or less reliable than in the linked data, such that we based our estimates of VE on the subset with linked records. This may introduce a bias to the extent that those who do and do not consent to data linkage may differ in important ways, such as ...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265190: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">An extensive search strategy was designed to retrieve all relevant articles published in PubMed up to 15 Mar 2021, using the following MeSH terms: “COVID-19” AND “Immunoassay” AND “Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction”.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>PubMed</div><div>suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>MeSH</div><div>suggested: (MeSH, RRID:SCR_004750)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To ensure comprehensiveness, other databases such as Embase, Google Scholar, EBSCO, and Scopus were similarly searched for additional relevant articles.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Embase</div><div>suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Google Scholar</div><div>suggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This drop-off may actually be an advantage rather than a limitation of the Ag-RDT since it has been reported that high Ct-value has a reduced chance of successful culture and of being contagious,68 which has been shown to be between Ct ranging from 24–30.69,70 This suggests that individuals start being more contagious at the threshold where the Ag-RDT operates best. Therefore, in case an Ag-RDT fails to detect an infected individual of Ct >25, it is likely that the individual is either noncontagious or is in early infection, which can be resolved by re-testing on subsequent days for contacts of a documented case. In our study, we considered the RT-PCR to be a reference test, rather than a gold standard as done by previous meta-analyses targeting the same topic. This makes our study the first meta-analysis to have presented the PPA and NPA of Ag-RDTs, which is a primary strength of this study and allows interpretation of results for decision-makers. In addition, we used robust methodologies19 and broad yet specific selection criteria. It is also important to note that although this is an agreement study, we have found QUADAS-216 to be suitable for quality assessment of diagnostic agreement studies with only the exclusion of a single safeguard. There are a few limitations to our meta-analysis that should be mentioned. To begin with, not enough studies have stratified their analysis based on Ct-value, which resulted in data limitation clearly shown in our results. An example wou...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21264712: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Ethical considerations: This protocol was submitted to KNH-UoN Ethics and Research Committee for review.<br>Consent: We sought for approval to conduct the study from UoN-KNH ERC before sharing the consent form and the questionnaire to collect data from the respondents.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A self-administered questionnaire hosted on the Research Electronic Data Capture application (REDCap) was used.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>REDCap</div><div>suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data management: IBM SPSS Statistics software was utilized for data analysis.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      A few limitations were found in this study; some healthcare workers who participated in the research study did not fully fill the questionnaire. The questionnaire was made as short as possible and by using a user-friendly design hence a response rate of 95%. There also may have been a selection bias by leaving out healthcare workers who may not have had access to internet. Another limitation is that the REDCap application is configured for ease of use on a smart phone or a computer and therefore health workers without one of these devices may have been unable to participate. This is an inherent weakness in the study.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265149: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: This quality assessment project received a Determination of Non-Research from Stanford Institutional Review Board as well as by VA determination.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We conducted all statistical analyses using Stata Version 15 (StataCorp LLC).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>StataCorp</div><div>suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 evaluation is focused on evaluating the association of area-level county-level SDH and COVID-19 test and test positivity of our unique Veteran population, who are on average are male, older, and have more comorbidities than the general US population, which limits generalizability.13 Furthermore, our evaluation does not assign weights to the county-level SDH relative to each other since there is no strong evidence to rigorously assign importance across categories.1 The association between COVID-19 infection risk and Veterans’ county-level SDH may be stronger than the estimated results presented here owing to the fact that some of the covariates adjusted for in this analysis may likely be mediators in the pathway, which would attenuate risk. Lastly, Veterans’ home address may not fully capture where Veterans spend most of their time which may result in exposure misclassification, however, we anticipate misclassification would be attenuated by county-level aggregation.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.14.21264933: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: This study was approved by the Comitè d’Ètica i Investigació en Medicaments (Institutional Review Board) of Hospital Universitari de Sant Joan (Resolution CEIM 040/2018, amended on 16 April 2020).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">All calculations were made using the SPSS 25.0 statistical package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      A caveat to the present study is its single-center nature in a specific region of Mediterranean Europe. However, we think that the results can be extrapolated to regions and countries that have had similar circumstances, i.e. a high incidence of the Delta variant together with a high vaccination rate. At a time when the elderly population is already largely protected, a special effort must be made to vaccinate young people in order to achieve group immunity as soon as possible.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21264979: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The trial adheres to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee from Erasmus Medical Center (MEC 2021-0132) and the local review boards of the other participating centers.<br>Consent: All participants provided written informed consent before enrollment.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethical statement: The SWITCH trial is a single-(participant)-blinded, multi-center, randomized controlled trial among 434 healthy health care workers (HCWs) performed in four academic hospitals in the Netherlands (Amsterdam University Medical Center</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Participants were blinded to the allocated vaccine by applying blinded etiquettes to conceal volume and appearance.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N)-specific antibodies were measured to confirm that participants had not been previously exposed to SARS CoV-2.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid ( N)-specific</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Spike (S)-specific binding antibodies were measured at 0 and 28 days after the booster vaccination using a quantitative anti-spike IgG assay (Liaison SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assay, DiaSorin, Italy</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-spike IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Neutralizing capacity of antibodies against infectious SARS CoV-2 D614G was assessed in a plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) on Vero-E6 cells.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Vero-E6</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      A potential limitation of our study is that we have exclusively evaluated booster vaccinations in young HCWs without severe comorbidities, and we may not be able translate these results to other populations. However, previous studies on homologous vaccination regimens show similar immunogenicity data comparing younger (18–55 years) and older (>55 years) adults 32-34. Furthermore, we evaluated the heterologous booster vaccination regimens in a three-month interval from the priming vaccination, to allow a comparison with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 trials 35, but the optimal prime-boost interval remains to be investigated. The homologous prime-boost intervals in the Ad26.COV2.S trials published after inception of the SWITCH trial varied from 2 to 6 months 6,36, and suggest that late boosting might be more effective. This would further enhance the effect observed in our study. In conclusion, single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccination adequately primes the immune system. We now show that in face of possible waning immunity and circulation of SARS-CoV-2 variants, these responses can be boosted most efficiently with mRNA vaccines. Upon boosting, an increased VE against infection and transmission is likely, but future studies will need to show the added value of boosting on VE against severe disease. Discussion on the need for booster vaccination should also consider timing, the target population, the level of SARS CoV-2 circulation, and the global inequity in vaccine access.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04927936</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">A Trial Among HealthCare Workers (HCW) Vaccinated With Janss…</td></tr></table>


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265187: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the ethics committee of Eastern Switzerland (#2020-00502).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Anti-nucleocapsid protein antibodies (anti-N) were determined to assess seropositivity against SARS-CoV-2, as described previously [13].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-nucleocapsid protein</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-N</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">For most of anti-N positive HCW, anti-spike protein antibodies (anti-S) were measured.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-N positive HCW, anti-spike protein</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-S</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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 limitations. First, assessing the presence of long-COVID symptoms at only one time point might have led to underestimation of their prevalence as symptoms are reported to be fluctuating [5]. Second, we cannot exclude that certain individuals with COVID-19 did not show any seroconversion or that anti-N had again waned below the detection level at time of our blood draw. However, we consider this effect to be small as most individuals, even after mild/moderate infection, show robust and prolonged antibody reaction [39]; also, individuals were asked to report any positive NPS, which further reduces the risk of misclassification. Third, participants knew about their SARS-CoV-2 status (both for serology and NPS) at time of the long-COVID questionnaire, which might be a source of recall bias. However, the fact that participants with the highest concentration of anti-S (titers not known to participants) had higher symptom scores suggests a true effect. Fourth, the delta variant, which was not yet the predominant strain when the study was conducted, might differently impact the occurrence of long-COVID symptoms [40]. Fifth, we did not assess long-COVID symptoms at baseline which precludes us from estimating the true impact of the pandemic on the prevalence of these symptoms. Nevertheless, the inclusion of a non-infected control group allowed us to assess the independent impact of SARS-CoV-2 on the occurrence of these often non-specific symptoms. In conclusion, we show t...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.464686: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Cells and Reagents: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from peripheral blood of healthy donors as previously described [20], after we obtained approval from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Institutional Review Board.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Anti-SPTBN and anti-b-actin antibodies were obtained from Abcam (Waltham, MA, USA) and Sigma Aldrich, respectively.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Anti-SPTBN</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-b-actin</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">HIV replication assay: The HIV stocks of X4 (HIVNL4.3) [21] and R5 (HIVAD8) [22] viruses were prepared by transfection of the plasmid encoding each HIV strain into HEK293T cells, and the viruses were then purified from culture supernatants of the transfected cells using ultracentrifugation with 20% sucrose at 100,000 × g for 2h and infectious titers were determined by the endpoint assay as previously described [23].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK293T</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To obtain absolute proviral DNA copy numbers, standard curves were generated using serial dilutions of a plasmid encoding HIV gag region (pHIVgag) and RNaseP gene (pRNaseP) as previously described [24,25].</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pRNaseP</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The intensity of the bands was analyzed by NIH Image J (http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Image J</div><div>suggested: (ImageJ, RRID:SCR_003070)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis: Statistical analysis was performed using the Analysis ToolPak from Microsoft Excel.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Microsoft Excel</div><div>suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


      Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).


      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265269: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: The study was approved by the local Institutional Review Board (Ref.:26022021-CN-1e-CI) and conducted per the Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments that involve humans.<br>Consent: The inclusion criteria for the patients’ recruitment were individuals of both genders between the age of 18 and 100 years old, who had accepted and signed an informed consent form and pretended to complete the BNT126b2 regimen.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The inclusion criteria for the patients’ recruitment were individuals of both genders between the age of 18 and 100 years old, who had accepted and signed an informed consent form and pretended to complete the BNT126b2 regimen.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The individuals were introduced to the research process, which consisted of a follow-up during an entire year through SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies measurement samples followed by questionnaires.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Since this protocol was approved after the application of the first BNT, twenty-one days after receiving the first dose, the research team reached every participant to take a plasma sample for the IgG antibodies measurement and apply the first questionnaire.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The third, fourth, and fifth IgG antibodies samples were planned to be taken three, six, and twelve months after completing the two-dose regimen of BNT126b2, respectively.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>fifth IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The equipment used by the laboratory personnel to analyze the samples was the LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1 / S2 IgG antibody detection kit (Italy).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S2 IgG</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">To determine the amount of specific anti-S1 and anti-S2 IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in plasma samples, the laboratory personnel used the chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA); which had a sensitivity of 97.4% (95% CI, 86.8-99.5) and a specificity of 98.5% (95% CI, 97.5-99.2).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-S1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>86.8-99.5</div><div>suggested: (GenWay Biotech Inc. Cat# GWB-868995, RRID:AB_10516413)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">In the three-month follow-up, there was a decrease in the amount of specific anti-S1 and anti-S2 IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The analyzed biochemical variables were: SARS-CoV-2 quantitative antibodies from 21-28 days post-BNT126b2 first dose (S1), 21-28 days post-BNT126b2 second dose (S2), three-month follow-up after completing the two-dose BNT126b2 regimen (S3), and 1-7 days (S4) and 21-28 days post-BNT-boost (S5).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S3</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>S5</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The statistical program used was SPSS, version 2.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      A limitation to our study was that the recruited group did not have a baseline sample taken before the first BNT162b2 dose because our protocol was approved after the health workers had received the first dose. However, we believe that this study is significant because of the non-immunocompromised population that we used. Another limitation was the analysis of the third dose’s side effects only in the short-term (21-28 days after the booster dose). We will continue following this cohort group to see any long-term side effects related to the vaccine, but we just reported the short-term side effects for this study.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265273: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Patients were 47% (n=75) female and 53% (n=85) male.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Culture: HEK293T cells (ATCC CRL-11268, CVCL_1926) and HEK293T-hACE2 cells (BEI NR-52511) were grown in DMEM (Gibco, 11965-092) supplemented with 10% (vol/vol</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK293T-hACE2</div><div>suggested: RRID:CVCL_A7UK)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, HEK293T cells were transfected with HIV-1 NL4.3-inGluc and pcDNA3.1-SARS-CoV2-S-C9 constructs in a 2:1 ratio using polyelthylenimine (PEI).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK293T</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Virus and serum mixture were incubated for 1 hr at 37°C, and then added to HEK293T-ACE2 cells seeded at 2 × 104 cells/well.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK293T-ACE2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">This construct is based on a ΔEnv pNL4.3 HIV-1 vector and contains an anti-sense Gaussia luciferase (Gluc) gene with a sense intron.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pNL4.3 HIV-1</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Briefly, HEK293T cells were transfected with HIV-1 NL4.3-inGluc and pcDNA3.1-SARS-CoV2-S-C9 constructs in a 2:1 ratio using polyelthylenimine (PEI).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pcDNA3.1-SARS-CoV2-S-C9</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Quantification and Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed as mean with Standard Error of Mean (SEM), Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 5.0 as follows: One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni’s post-tests was used to compute statistical significance (p values) between multiple groups for multiple comparison or t-test was used for two groups for single comparison.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NT50 values were calculated from VNA output using a non-linear regression with least-squares fit in GraphPad Prism5 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, California USA, www.graphpad.com).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265278: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Patients: Our institution’s Institutional Review Board reviewed and approved this retrospective study (STUDY00000506) and granted a waiver of HIPAA authorization and written informed consent.<br>Consent: Patients: Our institution’s Institutional Review Board reviewed and approved this retrospective study (STUDY00000506) and granted a waiver of HIPAA authorization and written informed consent.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">100 cases (50 RT-PCR positive and 50 RT-PCR negative) were randomly selected to be read by all 10 readers and the remaining 1927 cases were randomly assigned to be read by two readers.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Readers were blinded to RT-PCR results and instructed to treat each image as a person under investigation (PUI) to reflect the common emergency department workflow where patient information may be unknown and symptoms such as cough, dyspnea, shortness of breath, or fever may overlap.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using the Pandas and scikit-learn Python library. (11) Data visualizations were generated using matplotlib and Seaborn in Python. (</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>matplotlib</div><div>suggested: (MatPlotLib, RRID:SCR_008624)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">(12,13) Interreader agreement was calculated using the Fleiss κ score as implemented in the nltk.metrics.agreement Python (14) module.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Python</div><div>suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This limitation may still exist in underserved regions both domestically and internationally or as new waves such as the recent surge due to the Delta variant occur and strain healthcare resources. Our study demonstrates three major findings, 1) that there is low utility of CXRs in diagnosing patients who will be COVID-19 positive, 2) clinical history is not useful in improving the radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis, and 3) CXRs are more useful for excluding COVID-19 diagnosis with a consistent level of performance across a diverse group of radiologists. There was a very low rate of assigning COVID-19 labels for RT-PCR negative patients, totaling 0.6% (6/950) when two radiologists agreed and 4.0% (38/950) when they disagreed. This observation persists even with the introduction of clinical history of chest pain, cough, infection, PUI or shortness of breath. For RT-PCR positive patients, we find that radiologists have poor interrater agreement of labels (Fleiss score 0.36), and nonspecific performance for diagnosing COVID-19 with wide distribution of the remaining labels and low sensitivity for detection. Two readers agreed on a COVID-19 diagnosis only 15.9% (110/688) of the time, and one of two readers labeled COVID-19 23.8% (164/688) of the time. This performance does not improve even when the clinical history is provided, and improves only slightly with >5 years of experience among the readers. We also did not note any increase in COVID-19 diagnostic performance...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265283: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We used four methods for convenience sample recruitment: (1) paid advertisements via Front Porch Forum, a community-level listserv, which reaches approximately 2/3 of Vermont households (30); (2) paid digital ads via Facebook to reach populations under-represented in Front Porch Forum (e.g., males, lower-income households); (3) listservs of community partners; (4) a University of Vermont press release and subsequent newspaper, radio, and television media.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We used all available data and assumed any missing data were missing at random.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.


      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
      However, two limitations of our work are the small sample size and that food insecurity is treated as a binary outcome. Though the use of food assistance programs and/or unemployment did not necessarily move households out of food insecurity, it may have reduced the severity of the food insecurity they were experiencing and/or allowed households to reallocate money they would normally spend on food towards other essentials such as housing and healthcare. Future research using this longitudinal dataset will examine how various interventions, including federal and community food assistance programs and unemployment benefits affected food insecurity outcomes in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in more depth while treating food insecurity as a continuum. Overall, our findings indicate that food insecurity continued to be a significant challenge one year after the start of the pandemic despite loosened restrictions and new policies that aimed to provide economic relief. Trends from previous economic recessions show that it can take years after economic recovery begins for food insecurity rates to return to pre-recession levels (4,46) and the financial hardships experienced during the pandemic will linger for some households even after they return to work, as they catch up on past due bills and replenish depleted savings. As some of the support programs come to an end (e.g., enhanced unemployment insurance, mortgage relief, eviction moratorium, student loan forbearance, etc....

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265221: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265222: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Patient Population and Study Design: After approval by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board, this retrospective study enrolled fully vaccinated patients with breakthrough COVID-19 who were screened for eligibility for treatment with bamlanivimab (Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN), bamlanivimab-etesevimab (Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN) or casirivimab-imdevimab (Regeneron, New York) as single infusion from January to August 16, 2021.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data was analyzed using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Excel for Office 365, Version 16.0.13127.21766, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA) and BlueSky Statistics (Commercial Server Edition, Version 7.40).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Microsoft Excel</div><div>suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      This was a retrospective study with the inherent limitations to this study design. For example, we would not have captured treated patients who may have been hospitalized at outside institutions. However, we believe that this is not a considerable number since our program enrolls high-risk patients to a remote monitoring program, thereby ensuring continued contact with these patients until symptom resolution5. Our population was predominantly Caucasian, and our findings may not be generalizable to other patient populations. Most patients received treatment with casirivimab-imdevimab, limiting generalizability to other monoclonal antibodies such as bamlanivimab-etesevimab and sotrovimab. The study observations should also be interpreted in the context that it was performed in patients screened and treated in a single healthcare system. These limitations are counterbalanced by having a relatively large cohort of breakthrough COVID-19 cases identified in our healthcare system, with many identified during the period of the Delta surge. This large patient cohort allowed for robust statistical analysis of the potential efficacy of treatment with monoclonal antibody therapy.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265209: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Distribution of randomization times since symptom onset Fig.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      We acknowledge some important limitations to our study. First a more complete evaluation of remdesivir would involve the analysis of viral dynamics in the lower respiratory tract, as was done in non-human primates (12, 13). Here, viral loads in lower respiratory tracts were available in a subset of 120 individuals. However, the number of samples were limited and these individuals had a very severe disease (Supplementary table S6.), making it not possible to provide an unbiased and precise estimate of remdesivir. Second, we could not evaluate the association between remdesivir drug concentration and viral decay, which would be important to draw more definitive evidence on remdesivir antiviral activity. Here, drug concentrations were available for only a limited number of patients (N=61), and no significant association between drug concentrations and the time to viral clearance (Supplementary Fig. S6.) could be found. Moreover, given that symptom onset are posterior to the peak viral load (17, 27), a potential bias in the estimation of early viral dynamic parameters cannot be ruled out (see a discussion on that aspect in Néant et al (17)), in particular in hospitalized patients. Finally, the use of adjuvant drugs such as corticosteroids or any immunosuppressive treatment which might promote viral replication, as well as the intrinsic immune competency of each treated individual have not been considered. In conclusion, the use of a within-host model of the infection allowed us t...

      Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:<br><table><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Identifier</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Status</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Title</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">NCT04315948</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Recruiting</td><td style="min-width:95px; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Trial of Treatments for COVID-19 in Hospitalized Adults</td></tr></table>


      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.
      • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

      Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.14.21264762: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: All participants provided written consent to participate in the study which was performed according to the EU guidelines and following the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.<br>Field Sample Permit: Serum sample collection was included in the study “ACE2 as a biomarker with utility for identification of high risk population for SARSCoV-2 infection and prognosis of evolution in COVID-19” approved by Autonomous University of Madrid Research Ethics Committee, no.2352.<br>IRB: Serum sample collection was included in the study “ACE2 as a biomarker with utility for identification of high risk population for SARSCoV-2 infection and prognosis of evolution in COVID-19” approved by Autonomous University of Madrid Research Ethics Committee, no.2352.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Serum samples were received coded from the providers and the experimentalists were blinded to their nature until all data analysis was finalized.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Contamination: Cells were routinely tested for the absence of mycoplasma.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Then cells were stained with 50 µl of the following cocktail of antibodies and viability reagent prepared in working buffer: 1:100 of mouse anti-human IgG1-PE (Ref.: 9054-09, Southern Biotech), 1:100 of mouse anti-human IgM-Pacific Blue (Ref.: PB-320-C100, Exbio), 1:50 of goat anti-human IgA-Alexa Fluor 647 (2052-31, Southern Biotech) and 1:50 of 7-AAD Viability Staining Solution (EXBOO26, Exbio).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgG1-PE</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgM-Pacific Blue ( Ref .</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IgA-Alexa Fluor 647 ( 2052-31 , Southern Biotech )</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cells: The human T-cell line Jurkat clone E6-1 was acquired from ATCC (TIB-152).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Jurkat</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Organisms/Strains</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">SARS-CoV-2 S Jurkat Flow-Cytometry Immunoassay (JFCI) procedure: Jurkat-S-GFP cells were adjusted to 1,2×105 cells per well and plated in 96 well plates.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>Jurkat-S-GFP</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Jurkat-S-GFP were stablished by transduction with the lentiviral vector based on the epHIV-7 plasmid where the human EGFR reporter was substituted by GFP and the full-length Spike S protein of Wuhan-Hu-1 was cloned (Horndler et al., 2021b).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>epHIV-7</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data were processed with FlowJo software (BD).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FlowJo</div><div>suggested: (FlowJo, RRID:SCR_008520)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistics: All data was analyzed using the GraphPad Prism 7 software.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21265113: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Participants were provided contact information for the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) study team for recruitment and informed consent.<br>IRB: The BIDMC Institutional Review Board approved this study (#2021P000344) as part of a parent biorepository study (#2020P000361).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cell Line Authentication</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Antibodies</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The plates were again washed 3 times and 50 μL of SULFO-Tagged anti-Human IgG detection antibody diluted to 1x in Diluent 100 was added to each well and incubated shaking at 700 rpm at room temperature for at least 1 h.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-Human IgG</div><div>suggested: (RevMAb Biosciences Cat# 31-1019-MK, RRID:AB_2783627)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) assay: 106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells well were re-suspended in 100 µL of R10 media supplemented with CD49d monoclonal antibody (1 µg/mL) and CD28 monoclonal antibody (1 µg/mL) as described previously.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD49d</div><div>suggested: (BD Biosciences Cat# 347690, RRID:AB_647457)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD28</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The next day, the cells were washed twice with DPBS, stained with aqua live/dead dye for 10 mins and then stained with predetermined titers of monoclonal antibodies against CD279 (clone EH12.1, BB700), CD4 (clone L200, BV711),</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD279</div><div>suggested: (BD Biosciences Cat# 746185, RRID:AB_2743534)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD4</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BV711</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Cells were washed twice with 1X Perm Wash buffer (BD Perm/WashTM Buffer 10X in the CytoFix/CytoPerm Fixation/ Permeabilization kit diluted with MilliQ water and passed through 0.22µm filter) and stained with intracellularly with monoclonal antibodies against IFN-γ (clone B27; BUV395), and CD3 (clone SP34.2, Alexa 700), for 30 min.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>IFN-γ</div><div>suggested: (BD Biosciences Cat# 563563, RRID:AB_2738277)</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>CD3</div><div>suggested: (BD Biosciences Cat# 556610, RRID:AB_396483)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay: ELISPOT plates were coated with mouse anti-human IFN-γ monoclonal antibody from MabTech at 1 µg/well and incubated overnight at 4°C.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>anti-human IFN-γ</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Experimental Models: Cell Lines</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">luciferase reporter plasmid pLenti-CMV Puro-Luc (Addgene) and spike protein expressing pcDNA3.1-SARS-CoV-2 SΔCT were co-transfected into HEK293T cells (ATCC CRL_3216) with lipofectamine 2000 (ThermoFisher Scientific).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK293T</div><div>suggested: ATCC Cat# CRL-3216, RRID:CVCL_0063)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">The mixture was incubated at 37 °C for 1 h before adding to HEK293T-hACE2 cells.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>HEK293T-hACE2</div><div>suggested: RRID:CVCL_A7UK)</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Recombinant DNA</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Pseudovirus neutralizing antibody assay: The SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses expressing a luciferase reporter gene were used to measure pseudovirus neutralizing antibodies as described previously.5,6 In brief, the packaging construct psPAX2 (AIDS Resource and Reagent Program)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>psPAX2</div><div>suggested: RRID:Addgene_12260)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">luciferase reporter plasmid pLenti-CMV Puro-Luc (Addgene) and spike protein expressing pcDNA3.1-SARS-CoV-2 SΔCT were co-transfected into HEK293T cells (ATCC CRL_3216) with lipofectamine 2000 (ThermoFisher Scientific).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pLenti-CMV Puro-Luc</div><div>suggested: None</div></div><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>pcDNA3.1-SARS-CoV-2</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Pseudovirus neutralizing antibody assay: The SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses expressing a luciferase reporter gene were used to measure pseudovirus neutralizing antibodies as described previously.5,6 In brief, the packaging construct psPAX2 (AIDS Resource and Reagent Program)</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>AIDS Resource and Reagent Program</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Fixed cells were transferred to 96-well round bottom plate and analyzed by BD FACSymphony™ system.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BD FACSymphony™</div><div>suggested: None</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Data were analyzed using FlowJo v9.9</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>FlowJo</div><div>suggested: (FlowJo, RRID:SCR_008520)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics were calculated using GraphPad Prism 8.4.3, (</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad Prism</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">(GraphPad Software, San Diego, California).</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>GraphPad</div><div>suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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:
      One limitation of this study is the relatively small number of individuals in this immunologic analysis compared with the large total number of individuals in this outbreak. Nevertheless, the magnitude and consistency of the immunologic differences observed between vaccinated infected and vaccinated uninfected individuals suggest the generalizability of the conclusions. Another limitation is the fact that the vaccinated infected group was generally younger than the vaccinated uninfected group, which may reflect different risk behaviors or exposures based on age. However, age did not appear to correlate with the magnitude of binding or neutralizing antibody titers in this cohort (Fig. S2). In conclusion, we describe humoral and cellular immune responses in the first large, well described cluster of breakthrough infections with the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant in fully vaccinated individuals in the United States. Breakthrough infection led to a large increase in antibody and T cell responses in vaccinated individuals, suggesting important immunologic benefits of vaccination even when infection was not prevented. Moreover, anamnestic antibody responses in breakthrough infections were similar in magnitude regardless of the length of time from vaccination (Fig. S3), suggesting the possibility of protection against severe disease for a prolonged period of time even after serum antibody titers decline. These data provide unique insights into the immunology of breakthrough infections wit...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21265130: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Consent: Before beginning the questionnaire, a request to declare voluntary consent was provided stating voluntary acceptance to participate, after describing the study and its objectives with ensuring the participants’ data privacy.<br>IRB: The study was approved to be in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki by AL-Najah National University’ Ethics Committee.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Targeting a sample size of more than 226 for COVID-19 patients with a case: control ratio of 1:2, considering a 95% confidence interval and 90% power with an expected frequency of 18% vs 9% among COVID-19, general participants respectively. (6,14,15) Participants who were older than 18 years and had COVID-19 within 6 months were recruited with a matched healthy control group.</td></tr></table>

      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:
      However, the study had many limitations, as it was based on a questionnaire, all results were subjective, and findings were not confirmed clinically, like by slit-lamp examination or Schirmer’s test. Additionally, its retrospective nature made it prone to recall bias, especially underestimating the ocular complaints incidence for considering eye manifestations are trifles, compared to other COVID-19 symptoms, though six months were chosen as recall memory would still be optimal. the control group had no tests as well, and so the possibility of someone having an asymptomatic COVID-19 was possible. But in both arms, symptoms of COVID-19 were investigated and the dilemmatic COVID-19 state cases were excluded. In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic had sequences that could even involve the eyes, causing irritations from the virus itself, and more broadly was responsible for the evolving of mask-associated dry eye, as part of its preventive measures. All of these should not be ignored and be considered when dealing with patients complaining of eye manifestations, and when need to wear masks for extended periods, lubricant or other methods would be suggested to avoid mask associated dryness.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.19.21265230: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Study design: This study involved a cross-sectional survey with 11 language groups, approved by Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (Project number 2020/ETH03085) Patient and public involvement: This study was co-designed by researchers, bilingual community members and Multicultural Health and Health Care Interpreter Service staff, and informed by the Framework for Culturally Competent Health Research (16).</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Analysis: Quantitative data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 24.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>SPSS</div><div>suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      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: This study was co-designed by researchers and multicultural health service staff, and enabled through recruitment methods that are inclusive and reduce barriers to participation, such as translated versions of the survey, engagement of interpreters and multicultural health staff who are trusted in their communities, and use of multiple recruitment methods (including through community events and networks). This approach wholly aligns with the Framework of Culturally Competent Health Research (16). However, practical constraints limited the number of languages we could include, and restricted data collection to three regions in Greater Sydney only. We also used convenience sampling methods. To reduce survey length and burden on participants we purposefully selected a small number of items from validated measures or our previous research to explore psychological, social and financial impacts, or co-designed them specifically for this study. Self-report may have introduced recall and social desirability bias. Finally, the results of this study reflect a particular point in time when there were very low numbers of community-acquired cases of COVID-19 in Australia, and for the most part, no government-imposed restrictions on movement and activities in New South Wales. It is likely that psychological wellbeing outcomes and financial and social stress have worsened since the July 2021 outbreak and the imposition of stay-at-home orders, in line with previous...

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.20.21265137: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">IRB: Sample and data collection: The research project (Protocol #1603078) was reviewed and approved by the MA Department of Public Health Institutional Review Board and covered by a reliance agreement at the Broad Institute.<br>Consent: Residual samples were collected and sequenced under a waiver of consent by the MADPH IRB.<br>Field Sample Permit: Some study staff maintain dual affiliations with Mass General Brigham and the Broad Institute, but this research was conducted solely at the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MADPH.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      Table 2: Resources

      <table><tr><th style="min-width:100px;text-align:center; padding-top:4px;" colspan="2">Software and Algorithms</th></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;text=align:center">Sentences</td><td style="min-width:100px;text-align:center">Resources</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We deposited genomes (Genbank), metadata (BioSample), and raw reads (SRA) to NCBI under BioProject PRJNA715749.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>BioProject</div><div>suggested: (NCBI BioProject, RRID:SCR_004801)</div></div></td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;vertical-align:top;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">We used LoFreq version 2.1.5 to call intrahost single nucleotide variants (iSNVs) with default parameters (minimum read depth ≥10, strand bias <85%, and default iSNV quality scoring)17.</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray"><div style="margin-bottom:8px"><div>LoFreq</div><div>suggested: (LoFreq, RRID:SCR_013054)</div></div></td></tr></table>

      Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.


      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>

    1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.18.21264783: (What is this?)

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

      Table 1: Rigor

      <table><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Ethics</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Sex as a biological variable</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Randomization</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Blinding</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr><tr><td style="min-width:100px;margin-right:1em; border-right:1px solid lightgray; border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">Power Analysis</td><td style="min-width:100px;border-bottom:1px solid lightgray">not detected.</td></tr></table>

      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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      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.


      <footer>

      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.

      </footer>