Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35422031›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Barriers to and strategies to address COVID-19 testing hesitancy: a rapid scoping review.

Mark Embrett, S Meaghan Sim, Hilary A T Caldwell, Leah Boulos, Ziwa Yu, Gina Agarwal, Rhiannon Cooper, Allyson J Gallant Aj, Iwona A Bielska, Jawad Chishtie and 3 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing 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

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

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

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Mark EmbrettFaculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. membrett@dal.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-3969-0219
S Meaghan SimResearch, Innovation & Discovery, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4477-3833
Hilary A T CaldwellHealthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2951-4542
Leah BoulosMaritime SPOR Support Unit, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9849-383X
Ziwa YuSchool of Nursing, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7694-5233
Gina AgarwalDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5691-4675
Rhiannon CooperDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9076-5178
Allyson J Gallant AjFaculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2933-7470
Iwona A BielskaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4186-4871
Jawad ChishtieHealth Services Outcomes and Evaluation Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8650-4469
Kathryn StoneSchool of Health and Human Performance, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Janet CurranFaculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9977-0467
Andrea TriccoKnowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4114-8971

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTesting is a foundational component of any COVID-19 management strategy; however, emerging evidence suggests that barriers and hesitancy to COVID-19 testing may affect uptake or participation and often these are multiple and intersecting factors that may vary across population groups. To this end, Health Canada's COVID-19 Testing and Screening Expert Advisory Panel commissioned this rapid review in January 2021 to explore the available evidence in this area. The aim of this rapid review was to identify barriers to COVID-19 testing and strategies used to mitigate these barriers.

methodsSearches (completed January 8, 2021) were conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, medRxiv/bioRxiv, Cochrane and online grey literature sources to identify publications that described barriers and strategies related to COVID-19 testing.

resultsFrom 1294 academic and 97 grey literature search results, 31 academic and 31 grey literature sources were included. Data were extracted from the relevant papers. The most cited barriers were cost of testing; low health literacy; low trust in the healthcare system; availability and accessibility of testing sites; and stigma and consequences of testing positive. Strategies to mitigate barriers to COVID-19 testing included: free testing; promoting awareness of importance to testing; presenting various testing options and types of testing centres (i.e., drive-thru, walk-up, home testing); providing transportation to testing centres; and offering support for self-isolation (e.g., salary support or housing).

conclusionVarious barriers to COVID-19 testing and strategies for mitigating these barriers were identified. Further research to test the efficacy of these strategies is needed to better support testing for COVID-19 by addressing testing hesitancy as part of the broader COVID-19 public health response.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingHumansCoronavirusCovid-19EquityHealth policyScoping reviewSocial determinants of healthTestingTesting hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID35422031
PMCPMC9008387

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.