Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36418047›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2022

Impact of community asymptomatic rapid antigen testing on covid-19 related hospital admissions: synthetic control study.

Xingna Zhang, Ben Barr, Mark Green, David Hughes, Matthew Ashton, Dimitrios Charalampopoulos, Marta García-Fiñana, Iain Buchan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Diagnostics and the 100-day mission: why preparedness cannot wait.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Xingna ZhangDepartment of Public Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK.
Ben BarrDepartment of Public Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK.
Mark GreenDepartment of Geography and Planning, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
David HughesDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Matthew AshtonLiverpool City Council, Liverpool, UK.
Dimitrios CharalampopoulosDepartment of Public Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK.
Marta García-FiñanaDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Iain BuchanDepartment of Public Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK buchan@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3392-1650

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R024847/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyse the impact of voluntary rapid testing for SARS-CoV-2 antigen in Liverpool city on covid-19 related hospital admissions.

designSynthetic control analysis comparing hospital admissions for small areas in the intervention population with a group of control areas weighted to be similar for past covid-19 related hospital admission rates and sociodemographic factors.

settingLiverpool city, UK, 6 November 2020 to 2 January 2021, under the intervention of Covid-SMART (systematic meaningful asymptomatic repeated testing) voluntary, open access supervised self-testing with lateral flow devices, compared with control areas selected from the rest of England. POPULATION: General population of Liverpool (n=498 042) and a synthetic control population from the rest of England.

main outcome measureWeekly covid-19 related hospital admissions for neighbourhoods in England.

resultsThe introduction of community testing was associated with a 43% (95% confidence interval 29% to 57%) reduction (146 (96 to 192) in total) in covid-19 related hospital admissions in Liverpool compared with the synthetic control population (non-adjacent set of neighbourhoods with aggregate trends in covid-19 hospital admissions similar to Liverpool) for the initial period of intensive testing with military assistance in national lockdown from 6 November to 3 December 2020. A 25% (11% to 35%) reduction (239 (104 to 333) in total) was estimated across the overall intervention period (6 November 2020 to 2 January 2021), involving fewer testing centres, before England's national roll-out of community testing, after adjusting for regional differences in tiers of covid-19 restrictions from 3 December 2020 to 2 January 2021.

conclusionsThe city-wide pilot of community based asymptomatic testing for SARS-CoV-2 was associated with substantially reduced covid-19 related hospital admissions. Large scale asymptomatic rapid testing for SARS-CoV-2 could help reduce transmission and prevent hospital admissions.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlHospitalizationHospitalsHumansSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID36418047
PMCPMC9682337

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.