ArticlePloS one2022
A mixed methods study evaluating acceptability of a daily COVID-19 testing regimen with a mobile-app connected, at-home, rapid antigen test: Implications for current and future pandemics.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- At-Home Versus Onsite COVID-19 School-based Testing: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.Pediatrics · 2023Trial
- Acceptability of COVID-19 self-testing among social and clinical vulnerable populations using a decentralized testing model in Abuja, Nigeria; A mixed methods analysis of an implementation study.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Community-Driven, Text Message-Based COVID-19 Surveillance System, Los Angeles County, California, USA, 2020-2024.Emerging infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Smart Healthcare at Home: A Review of AI-Enabled Wearables and Diagnostics Through the Lens of the Pi-CON Methodology.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Acceptability, Feasibility, and Uptake of COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Self-Testing at the Community Level in Tanzania.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- "You know, it feels like you can trust them": mixed methods implementation research to inform the scale up of a health disparities-responsive COVID-19 school testing program.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Evaluating the feasibility and attitudes towards SARS-CoV-2 self-testing in a rural population in Zimbabwe: a cross-sectional survey.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Children and adolescents' experiences of mandatory SARS-CoV-2 testing in schools: a cross-sectional survey.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Article
- On the impact of mass screening for SARS-CoV-2 through self-testing in Greece.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Which visual elements on packaging affect perceived credibility? A case study of in vitro diagnostic kits.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Feasibility of At-Home Serial Testing Using Over-the-Counter SARS-CoV-2 Tests With a Digital Smartphone App for Assistance: Longitudinal Cohort Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWidespread use of at-home rapid COVID-19 antigen tests has been proposed as an important public health intervention to interrupt chains of transmission. Antigen tests may be preferred over PCR because they provide on-demand results for relatively low cost and can identify people when they are most likely to be infectious, particularly when used daily. Yet the extent to which a frequent antigen testing intervention will result in a positive public health impact for COVID-19 will depend on high acceptability and high adherence to such regimens.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study assessing acceptability of and adherence to a daily at-home mobile-app connected rapid antigen testing regimen among employees of a US-based media company. Acceptability was assessed across seven domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.
resultsAmong 31 study participants, acceptability of the daily testing intervention was generally high, with participants reporting high perceived effectiveness, intervention coherence, and self-efficacy; positive affective attitude; acceptable degree of burden and opportunity cost; and assessing the intervention as ethical. 71% reported a preference to test daily using an at-home antigen test than weekly employment-based PCR. Mean adherence to the 21-day testing regimen was 88% with 43% of participants achieving 100% adherence, 48% testing at least every other day, and 10% testing less than every other day.
conclusionsDespite overall high acceptability and adherence, we identified three implementation challenges that must be addressed for frequent serial testing for COVID-19 to be implemented at scale and have a positive public health impact. First, users need guidance on how and when to adapt testing frequencies to different epidemiological conditions. Second, users and institutions need guidelines for how to safely store and share test results. Third, implementation of serial testing strategies must prioritize health equity and protect those most vulnerable to COVID-19.
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.