Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33636445›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2021

Public understanding of COVID-19 antibody testing and test results: A qualitative study conducted in the U.K. early in the pandemic.

Jan Lecouturier, Michael P Kelly, Fiona Graham, Carly Meyer, Mei Yee Tang, Louis Goffe, Chris Bonell, Susan Michie, Falko F Sniehotta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The next viral pandemic-where do we stand?Folia microbiologica · 2025
    Review
  4. From polarity to plurality: Perceptions of COVID-19 and policy measures in England and Scotland.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jan LecouturierPopulation and Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: jan.lecouturier@newcastle.ac.uk.
Michael P KellyPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK. Electronic address: mk744@medschl.cam.ac.uk.
Fiona GrahamPopulation and Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: Fiona.Graham@newcastle.ac.uk.
Carly MeyerCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK. Electronic address: carly.meyer@ucl.ac.uk.
Mei Yee TangPopulation and Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: Meiyee.Tang@newcastle.ac.uk.
Louis GoffePopulation and Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: Louis.Goffe@newcastle.ac.uk.
Chris BonellPublic Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK. Electronic address: chris.bonell@lstm.ac.uk.
Susan MichieCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK. Electronic address: s.michie@ucl.ac.uk.
Falko F SniehottaPopulation and Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: falko.sniehotta@newcastle.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, antibody testing was proposed by several countries as a surveillance tool to monitor the spread of the virus and potentially to ease restrictions. In the UK, antibody testing originally formed the third pillar of the UK Government's COVID-19 testing programme and was thought to offer hope that those with a positive antibody test result could return to normal life. However, at that time scientists and the public had little understanding of the longevity of COVID-19 antibodies, and whether they provided immunity to reinfection or transmission of the virus.

objectiveThis paper explores the UK public's understanding of COVID-19 testing, perceived test accuracy, the meaning of a positive test result, willingness to adhere to restrictive measures in response to an antibody test result and how they expect other people to respond.

methodsOn-line synchronous focus groups were conducted in April/May 2020 during the first wave of the pandemic and the most stringent period of the COVID-19 restrictive measures. Data were analysed thematically.

resultsThere was confusion in responses as to whether those with a positive or negative test should return to work and which restrictive measures would apply to them or their household members. Participants raised concerns about the wider public response to positive antibody test results and the adverse behavioural effects. There were worries that antibody tests could create a divided society particularly if those with a positive test result were given greater freedoms or chose to disregard the restrictive measures.

conclusionShould these tests be offered more widely, information should be developed in consultation with the public to ensure clarity and address uncertainty about test results and subsequent behaviours.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingPandemicsAntibodies, ViralHumansQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2Serologic TestsAntibodies, ViralAntibody testingCOVID-19PandemicsPublic healthPublic viewsQualitative research methodsUK

Identifiers

PMID33636445
PMCPMC7884253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.