Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34475190›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Perceptions on undertaking regular asymptomatic self-testing for COVID-19 using lateral flow tests: a qualitative study of university students and staff.

Marta Wanat, Mary Logan, Jennifer A Hirst, Charles Vicary, Joseph J Lee, Rafael Perera, Irene Tracey, Gordon Duff, Peter Tufano, Thomas Fanshawe and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors.

Marta WanatNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK marta.wanat@phc.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0163-1547
Mary LoganNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jennifer A HirstNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8416-2159
Charles VicaryNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Joseph J LeeNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Rafael PereraNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2418-2091
Irene TraceyMerton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Gordon DuffSt Hilda's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Peter TufanoSaïd Business School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Thomas FanshaweNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Lazaro MwandighaNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Brian D NicholsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0661-7362
Sarah Tonkin-CrineNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4470-1151
Richard HobbsNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSuccessful implementation of asymptomatic testing programmes using lateral flow tests (LFTs) depends on several factors, including feasibility, acceptability and how people act on test results. We aimed to examine experiences of university students and staff of regular asymptomatic self-testing using LFTs, and their subsequent behaviours. DESIGN AND

settingA qualitative study using semistructured remote interviews and qualitative survey responses, which were analysed thematically.

participantsPeople who were participating in weekly testing feasibility study, between October 2020 and January 2021, at the University of Oxford.

resultsWe interviewed 18 and surveyed 214 participants. Participants were motivated to regularly self-test as they wanted to know whether or not they were infected with SARS-CoV-2. Most reported that a negative test result did not change their behaviour, but it did provide them with reassurance to engage with permitted activities. In contrast, some participants reported making decisions about visiting other people because they felt reassured by a negative test result. Participants valued the training but some still doubted their ability to carry out the test. Participants were concerned about safety of attending test sites with lots of people and reported home testing was most convenient.

conclusionsClear messages highlighting the benefits of regular testing for family, friends and society in identifying asymptomatic cases are needed. This should be coupled with transparent communication about the accuracy of LFTs and how to act on either a positive or negative result. Concerns about safety, convenience of testing and ability to do tests need to be addressed to ensure successful scaling up of asymptomatic testing.

Indexed as

COVID-19Self-TestingCOVID-19 TestingHumansPerceptionSARS-CoV-2StudentsUniversitiesCOVID-19infection controlpublic healthqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID34475190
PMCPMC8413471

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.