Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34726608›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2021

Assessing Values and Preferences Toward SARS-CoV-2 Self-testing Among the General Population and Their Representatives, Health Care Personnel, and Decision-Makers: Protocol for a Multicountry Mixed Methods Study.

Sonjelle Shilton, Elena Ivanova Reipold, Albert Roca Álvarez, Guillermo Z Martínez-Pérez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sonjelle ShiltonFIND, the global alliance for diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1569-8758
Elena Ivanova ReipoldFIND, the global alliance for diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2872-5161
Albert Roca ÁlvarezUniversity of Lleida, Lleida, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4101-1457
Guillermo Z Martínez-PérezFIND, the global alliance for diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6756-9515
FIND · CHUniversitat de Lleida · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccessible, safe, and client-centered SARS-CoV-2 testing services are an effective way to halt its transmission. Testing enables infected individuals to isolate or quarantine to prevent further transmission. In countries with limited health systems and laboratory capacity, it can be challenging to provide accessible and safe screening for COVID-19. Self-testing provides a convenient, private, and safe testing option; however, it also raises important concerns about lack of counseling and ensuring timely reporting of self-test results to national surveillance systems. Investigating community members' views and perceptions regarding SARS-CoV-2 self-testing is crucial to inform the most effective and safe strategies for implementing said testing.

objectiveWe aimed to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 self-testing was useful to diagnose and prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 for populations in low-resource settings and under which circumstances it would be acceptable.

methodsThis multisite, mixed methods, observational study will be conducted in 9 countries-Brazil, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Peru, the Philippines, and South Africa-and will consists of 2 components: cross-sectional surveys and interviews (semistructured and group) among 4 respondent groupings: the general population, general population representatives, health care workers, and decision-makers. General population and health care worker survey responses will be analyzed separately from each other, using bivariate and multivariate inferential analysis and descriptive statistics. Semistructured interviews and group interviews will be audiorecorded, transcribed, and coded for thematic comparative analysis.

resultsAs of November 19, 2021, participant enrollment is ongoing; 4364 participants have been enrolled in the general population survey, and 2233 participants have been enrolled in the health care workers survey. In the qualitative inquiry, 298 participants have been enrolled. We plan to complete data collection by December 31, 2021 and publish results in 2022 via publications, presentations at conferences, and dissemination events specifically targeted at local decision-makers, civil society, and patient groups.

conclusionsThe views and perceptions of local populations are crucial in the discussion of the safest strategies for implementing SARS-CoV-2 self-testing. We intend to identify sociocultural specificities that may hinder or accelerate the widespread utilization of SARS-CoV-2 self-testing. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33088.

Indexed as

accessibilityCOVID-19decision-makingdiagnostichealth care workermixed methodspopulationpreferenceprotocolSARS-CoV-2screeningself-testingtestingtransmission

Identifiers

PMID34726608
PMCPMC8629348
OpenAlexW3207586487

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.