Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35296483›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2022

Impact of residual risk messaging to reduce false reassurance following test-negative results from asymptomatic coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) testing: an online experimental study of a hypothetical test.

Eleonore Batteux, Stefanie Bonfield, Leah Ffion Jones, Holly Carter, Natalie Gold, Richard Amlot, Theresa Marteau, Dale Weston

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. 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

8 authors.

Eleonore BatteuxBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, UK e.batteux@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5494-7385
Stefanie BonfieldBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7513-2575
Leah Ffion JonesBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0448-3471
Holly CarterBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2084-7263
Natalie GoldDepartment of Behavioural Insights, Public Health England, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0706-1618
Richard AmlotBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3481-6588
Theresa MarteauBehaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3025-1129
Dale WestonBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5304-7572

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIndividuals who receive a negative lateral flow coronavirus test result may misunderstand it as meaning 'no risk of infectiousness', giving false reassurance. This experiment tested the impact of adding information to negative test result messages about residual risk and the need to continue protective behaviours.

design4 (residual risk) × 2 (post-test result behaviours) between-subjects design.

settingOnline.

participants1200 adults from a representative UK sample recruited via Prolific (12-15 March 2021).

interventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to one of eight messages. Residual risk messages were: (1) 'Your coronavirus test result is negative' (control); (2) message 1 plus 'It's likely you were not infectious when the test was done' (current NHS Test & Trace (T&T); (3) message 2 plus 'But there is still a chance you may be infectious' (elaborated NHS T&T); and (4) message 3 plus infographic depicting residual risk (elaborated NHS T&T+infographic). Each message contained either no additional information or information about the need to continue following guidelines and protective behaviours. OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Proportion understanding residual risk of infectiousness and (2) likelihood of engaging in protective behaviours (scales 1-7).

resultsThe control message decreased understanding relative to the current NHS T&T message: 54% versus 71% (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR)=0.56 95% CI 0.34 to 0.95, p=0.030). Understanding increased with the elaborated NHS T&T (89%; AOR=3.25 95% CI 1.64 to 6.42, p=0.001) and elaborated NHS T&T+infographic (91%; AOR=5.16 95% CI 2.47 to 10.82, p<0.001) compared with current NHS T&T message. Likelihood of engaging in protective behaviours was unaffected by information (AOR=1.11 95% CI 0.69 to 1.80, χ

conclusionsA considerable proportion of participants misunderstood the residual risk following a negative test result. The addition of a single sentence ('But there is still a chance you may be infectious') to current NHS T&T wording increased understanding of residual risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: OSF: https://osf.io/byfz3/.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdultHumansNegative ResultsCOVID-19public health

Identifiers

PMID35296483
PMCPMC8927897

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.