ArticlePathogens and global health2023
Determinants of SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal testing in a rural community sample susceptible of first infection: the CHRIS COVID-19 study.
Article in Pathogens and global health, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cohort Profile: the Cooperative Health Research in South Tyrol study.International journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Trends and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a longitudinal study on an Alpine population representative sample.BMJ open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To characterize COVID-19 epidemiology, numerous population-based studies have been undertaken to model the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Less is known about what may drive the probability to undergo testing. Understanding how much testing is driven by contextual or individual conditions is important to delineate the role of individual behavior and to shape public health interventions and resource allocation. In the Val Venosta/Vinschgau district (South Tyrol, Italy), we conducted a population-representative longitudinal study on 697 individuals susceptible to first infection who completed 4,512 repeated online questionnaires at four-week intervals between September 2020 and May 2021. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were fitted to investigate associations of self-reported SARS-CoV-2 testing with individual characteristics (social, demographic, and biological) and contextual determinants. Testing was associated with month of reporting, reflecting the timing of both the pandemic intensity and public health interventions, COVID-19-related symptoms (odds ratio, OR:8.26; 95% confidence interval, CI:6.04-11.31), contacts with infected individuals within home (OR:7.47, 95%CI:3.81-14.62) or outside home (OR:9.87, 95%CI:5.78-16.85), and being retired (OR:0.50, 95%CI:0.34-0.73). Symptoms and next within- and outside-home contacts were the leading determinants of swab testing predisposition in the most acute phase of the pandemics. Testing was not associated with age, sex, education, comorbidities, or lifestyle factors. In the study area, contextual determinants reflecting the course of the pandemic were predominant compared to individual sociodemographic characteristics in explaining the SARS-CoV-2 probability of testing. Decision makers should evaluate whether the intended target groups were correctly prioritized by the testing campaign.
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.