ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021
Empirical evidence to understand the human factor for effective rapid testing against SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Antigen Testing (January 2023).Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Guideline
- Determining the optimal frequency of SARS-CoV-2 regular asymptomatic testing: A randomized feasibility trial in a home care setting.PloS one · 2024Trial
- Dataset of 69 German COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) surveys on pandemic attitudes, feelings and behaviours.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Review
- Estimating the impact of COVID-19 self-test availability and modifications in test-strategy on overall test uptake using an experimental vignette study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Self-tests for COVID-19: What is the evidence? A living systematic review and meta-analysis (2020-2023).PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Association of neighborhood-level sociodemographic factors with Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) distribution of COVID-19 rapid antigen tests in 5 US communities.BMC public health · 2023Observational
- Epidemic Management via Imperfect Testing: A Multi-criterial Perspective.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2023Article
- Facilitators and barriers to use rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 among community-dwelling older adults in Hong Kong: A population-based cross-sectional random telephone survey.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- [Use of and Attitudes toward Tests for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Corresponding Antibodies: Results of a Nationally Representative Survey in Late Summer 2021].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023Article
- The acceptance of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen self-testing: A cross-sectional study in China.Journal of medical virology · 2023Article
- Large-scale behavioural data are key to climate policy.Nature human behaviour · 2022Article
- Empirical evidence to understand the human factor for effective rapid testing against SARS-CoV-2.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rapid antigen point-of-care and home tests are available to laypeople. In four cross-sectional mixed-methods data collections conducted between December 2020 and March 2021 (
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.