ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2023
Acceptability, Feasibility, and Validity of Detecting Respiratory Pathogens During Acute Respiratory Illness in Participant-Collected Swabs in a Low-Income, Community Sample.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Participant self-collected versus research coordinator-collected nasal swabs for respiratory viral surveillance following influenza-like illness.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Community surveillance for acute respiratory illness (ARI) can include unsupervised participant-collected nasal swabs. Little is known about use of self-swabs in low-income populations or among households including extended family members and the validity of self-collected swabs. We assessed the acceptability, feasibility, and validity of unsupervised participant-collected nasal swabs in a low-income, community sample. Methods: This was a substudy of a larger prospective community-based ARI surveillance study in 405 households in New York City. Participating household members self-collected swabs on the day of a research home visit for an index case, and for 3-6 subsequent days. Demographics associated with agreement to participate and swab collection were assessed, and index case self-collected versus research staff-collected swab results were compared. Results: Most households (n = 292 [89.6%]) agreed to participate, including 1310 members. Being <18 years old, female, and the household reporter or member of the nuclear family (parents and children) were associated with both agreement to participate and self-swab collection. Being born in the United States or immigrating ≥10 years ago was associated with participation, and being Spanish-speaking and having less than a high school education were associated with swab collection. In all, 84.4% collected at least 1 self-swabbed specimen; self-swabbing rates were highest during the first 4 collection days. Concordance between research staff-collected swabs and self-swabs was 88.4% for negative swabs, 75.0% for influenza, and 69.4% for noninfluenza pathogens. Conclusions: Self-swabbing was acceptable, feasible, and valid in this low-income, minoritized population. Some differences in participation and swab collection were identified that could be noted by future researchers and modelers.
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.