Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35939422›Full record

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.

Nadia Nguyen, Benjamin Lane, Sangwon Lee, Sharon Lipsky Gorman, Yumeng Wu, Alicia Li, Helen Lu, Noemie Elhadad, Michael Yin, Kathrine Meyers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

Nadia NguyenThe Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Benjamin LaneThe Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Sangwon LeeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2948-4099
Sharon Lipsky GormanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Yumeng WuThe Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4586-0675
Alicia LiVagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Helen LuDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Noemie ElhadadDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Michael YinDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Kathrine MeyersThe Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8573-1958

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsCOVID-19 TestingDelivery of Health CareHumansPandemics

Identifiers

PMID35939422
PMCPMC9359568

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.