ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
Inferring COVID-19 testing and vaccination behavior from New Jersey testing data.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic factors promoting vaccine nationalism in the face of viral evolution.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Development of a behavioural modulation strategy for disease control based on network interventions.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Impact of unequal testing on vaccine effectiveness estimates across two study designs: a simulation study.Nature communications · 2025Article
- "Early, rapid, aggressive": when strategic interactions between governments, opposition, and lobbies can hinder effective responses to epidemics.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Characterizing the relationship between disease testing behaviors and infectious disease dynamics is of great importance for public health. Tests for both current and past infection can influence disease-related behaviors at the individual level, while population-level knowledge of an epidemic's course may feed back to affect one's likelihood of taking a test. The COVID-19 pandemic has generated testing data on an unprecedented scale for tests detecting both current infection (PCR, antigen) and past infection (serology); this opens the way to characterizing the complex relationship between testing behavior and infection dynamics. Leveraging a rich database of individualized COVID-19 testing histories in New Jersey, we analyze the behavioral relationships between PCR and serology tests, infection, and vaccination. We quantify interactions between individuals' test-taking tendencies and their past testing and infection histories, finding that PCR tests were disproportionately taken by people currently infected, and serology tests were disproportionately taken by people with past infection or vaccination. The effects of previous positive test results on testing behavior are less consistent, as individuals with past PCR positives were more likely to take subsequent PCR and serology tests at some periods of the epidemic time course and less likely at others. Lastly, we fit a model to the titer values collected from serology tests to infer vaccination trends, finding a marked decrease in vaccination rates among individuals who had previously received a positive PCR test. These results exemplify the utility of individualized testing histories in uncovering hidden behavioral variables affecting testing and vaccination.
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.