ArticleBMJ open2022
Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adherence to mask wearing and social distancing and use of lateral flow tests during the COVID19 pandemic in England and Wales based on the virus watch community cohort study.Discover public health · 2026Article
- Factors influencing uptake of diagnostic test interventions for SARS-CoV-2: A qualitative review.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Review
- Evaluating the feasibility and attitudes towards SARS-CoV-2 self-testing in a rural population in Zimbabwe: a cross-sectional survey.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Critical Evaluation of Global Infection Prevention and Control Guidelines for Dentistry Published during the First 2 Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of dentistry · 2024Review
- Evaluation of serum and urine biomarkers for severe COVID-19.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- People's willingness to use COVID-19 self-testing in Nigeria: a cross-sectional survey.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Voluntary risk mitigation behaviour can reduce impact of SARS-CoV-2: a real-time modelling study of the January 2022 Omicron wave in England.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- Diagnoses Based on C-Reactive Protein Point-of-Care Tests.Biosensors · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo examine public perspectives on lateral flow testing (LFT) for COVID-19.
designOnline survey with nested semi-structured interviews.
settingBirmingham, UK.
participants220 Birmingham residents, 21 of whom took part in an interview.
resultsFifty-six per cent of respondents had taken an LFT. Reasons for not testing included adherence to other government COVID-19 guidance, having had a vaccination and not thinking LFTs were accurate. In 16% of households with children nobody, including children, was testing. In households where children were testing, their parents or other adults were often not. Those who were testing and eligible for workplace and school testing were more likely to be testing twice weekly. In other settings, respondents were more likely to be testing on a one-off or ad hoc basis. Approximately half of respondents said that they were likely to visit friends and family after a negative test result and 10% that they were unlikely to self-isolate following a positive test result. In interviews, participants who were testing described the peace of mind that testing afforded them prior to activities or interactions with family and friends, including those they considered to be vulnerable. Interviewees who were not testing described concerns about test accuracy and also cited a lack of face-to-face interaction with others precluding the need to test. Participants were often testing flexibly according to circumstances and perceived risk of COVID-19 transmission.
conclusionsWhile some choose not to test, others are doing so in order to provide peace of mind to engage in personal interactions they might otherwise have avoided. This peace of mind may be a necessary pre-requisite for some to more fully re-engage in pre-pandemic activities. Despite clear concerns about test accuracy among those not testing, those who are testing held generally positive attitudes towards the continued use of LFTs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.