Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34449784›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Feasibility and acceptability of SARS-CoV-2 testing and surveillance in primary school children in England: Prospective, cross-sectional study.

Felicity Aiano, Samuel E I Jones, Zahin Amin-Chowdhury, Jessica Flood, Ifeanyichukwu Okike, Andrew Brent, Bernadette Brent, Joanne Beckmann, Joanna Garstang, Shazaad Ahmad and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Felicity AianoPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0746-1075
Samuel E I JonesPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Zahin Amin-ChowdhuryPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Jessica FloodPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Ifeanyichukwu OkikePublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew BrentOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Bernadette BrentOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Joanne BeckmannPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Joanna GarstangPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9268-0581
Shazaad AhmadManchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Frances BaawuahPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Mary E RamsayPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Shamez N LadhaniPublic Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Public Health England · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBBirmingham Community Healthcare NHS Trust · GBEast London NHS Foundation Trust · GBManchester Royal Infirmary · GBSt George's, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe reopening of schools during the COVID-19 pandemic has raised concerns about widespread infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in educational settings. In June 2020, Public Health England (PHE) initiated prospective national surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in primary schools across England (sKIDs). We used this opportunity to assess the feasibility and agreeability of large-scale surveillance and testing for SARS-CoV-2 infections in school among staff, parents and students.

methodsStaff and students in 131 primary schools were asked to complete a questionnaire at recruitment and provide weekly nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing (n = 86) or swabs with blood samples for antibody testing (n = 45) at the beginning and end the summer half-term. In six blood sampling schools, students were asked to complete a pictorial questionnaire before and after their investigations.

resultsIn total, 135 children aged 4-7 years (n = 40) or 8-11 years (n = 95) completed the pictorial questionnaire fully or partially. Prior to sampling, oral fluid sampling was the most acceptable test (107/132, 81%) followed by throat swabs (80/134, 59%), nose swabs (77/132, 58%), and blood tests (48/130, 37%). Younger students were more nervous about all tests than older students but, after completing their tests, most children reported a "better than expected" experience with all the investigations. Students were more likely to agree to additional testing for nose swabs (93/113, 82%) and oral fluid (93/114, 82%), followed by throat swabs (85/113, 75%) and blood tests (72/108, 67%). Parents (n = 3,994) and staff (n = 2,580) selected a preference for weekly testing with nose swabs, throat swabs or oral fluid sampling, although staff were more flexible about testing frequency.

conclusionsPrimary school staff and parents were supportive of regular tests for SARS-CoV-2 and selected a preference for weekly testing. Children preferred nose swabs and oral fluids over throat swabs or blood sampling.

Indexed as

ChildChild, PreschoolCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingCross-Sectional StudiesEducational PersonnelEnglandHumansNasopharynxParentsPharynxProspective StudiesSARS-CoV-2SchoolsStudentsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID34449784
PMCPMC8396768
OpenAlexW3193399934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.