Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34487869›Full record

ArticlePublic health2021

Do members of the public think they should use lateral flow tests (LFT) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when they have COVID-19-like symptoms? The COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses study.

L E Smith, H W W Potts, R Amlȏt, N T Fear, S Michie, G J Rubin

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

L E SmithPsychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response, King's College London, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK. Electronic address: louise.e.smith@kcl.ac.uk.
H W W PottsInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, Institute of Health Informatics, 222 Euston Road, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
R AmlȏtNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response, King's College London, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK; Behavioural Science and Insights Unit, Public Health England, Behavioural Science and Insights Unit, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, SP4 0JG, UK.
N T FearPsychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK; Academic Department of Military Mental Health, King's Centre for Military Health Research, London, UK.
S MichieCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, Centre for Behaviour Change, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
G J RubinPsychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response, King's College London, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK.
King's College London · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aimed to investigate public use of lateral flow tests (LFT) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when experiencing key COVID-19 symptoms. STUDY

designIn this study, data from two waves of a cross-sectional nationally representative online survey (data collected 1 and 2 June, and 14 and 15 June 2021; n = 3665 adults aged ≥18 years living in England or Scotland) were used.

methodsWe report data investigating which type of test, if any, the public think Government guidance asks people to use if they have COVID-19 symptoms. In people with key COVID-19 symptoms (high temperature / fever; new, continuous cough; loss of sense of smell; loss of taste), we also describe the uptake of testing, if any.

resultsTen percent of respondents thought Government guidance stated that they should take an LFT if symptomatic, whereas 18% of people thought that they should take a PCR test; 60% of people thought they should take both types of test (12% did not select either option). In people who were symptomatic, 32% reported taking a test to confirm whether they had COVID-19. Of these, 53% reported taking a PCR test and 44% reported taking an LFT.

conclusionsDespite Government guidance stating that anyone with key COVID-19 symptoms should complete a PCR test, a significant percentage of the population use LFT tests when symptomatic. Communications should emphasise the superiority of, and need for, PCR tests in people with symptoms.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPolymerase Chain ReactionSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesAntigen testingBehaviourCOVID-19KnowledgeLateral flow devicesTesting

Identifiers

PMID34487869
PMCPMC8316130
OpenAlexW3185960222

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.