ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021
Danish citizens' preferences for at-home oropharyngeal/nasal SARS-CoV-2 specimen collection.
Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05209178 (Diagnostic Accuracy of Self-collected Versus Healthcare Collected Anterior Nose Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Detection - a Randomized Controlled Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Diagnostic Accuracy of Self-collected Versus Healthcare Collected Anterior Nose Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Detection - a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Tests With Self-Collected vs Health Care Worker-Collected Nasal and Throat Swab Specimens: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Article
- Citizens' perspectives on relocating care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Head-to-Head Comparison of Nasopharyngeal, Oropharyngeal and Nasal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Testing.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A comparison of conventional and advanced electroanalytical methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 virus: A concise review.Chemosphere · 2022Review
- Valid and Reliable Assessment of Upper Respiratory Tract Specimen Collection Skills during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiagnostic confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 by self-collection of specimens is a reliable method compared with healthcare worker collected samples. Citizens' preferences for collection methods are unknown, but at-home collection could have several advantages.
methodsThis study investigated the preference for guided at-home self-collection versus at-hospital specimen collection by healthcare workers.
resultsAmong the 3709 participants, at-home swab collection was the preferred setting for 2362 (63.7%) compared with 1347 (36.3%) reporting a preference for an at-hospital swabbing procedure.
conclusionA high preference for guided at-home self-collection of oropharyngeal/nasal SARS-CoV-2 specimens exists and could be a future norm beyond COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.