Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38885988›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

An evaluation of the national testing response during the COVID-19 pandemic in England: a multistage mixed-methods study protocol.

Reshania Naidoo, Ben Lambert, Merryn Voysey, Rima Shretta, Claire Marriott Keene, Marta Wanat, Billie Andersen-Waine, Prabin Dahal, Kasia Stepniewska, Rachel Hounsell and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

17 authors.

Reshania NaidooNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK reshania.naidoo@ndm.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3368-0255
Ben LambertCollege of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Merryn VoyseyOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Rima ShrettaNDM Centre for Global Health Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5011-5998
Claire Marriott KeeneNDM Centre for Global Health Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0875-5884
Marta WanatNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0163-1547
Billie Andersen-WaineErnst & Young, London, UK.
Prabin DahalUniversity of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2158-846X
Kasia StepniewskaNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Rachel HounsellNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sassy MolyneuxNDM Centre for Global Health Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sarah Pinto-DuschinskyErnst & Young, London, UK.
Emily RoweErnst & Young, London, UK.
Gulsen YenidoganErnst & Young, London, UK.
Tom FowlerUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Lisa WhiteNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Ey-Oxford Health Analytics ConsortiumErnst & Young, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn 2020, the UK government established a large-scale testing programme to rapidly identify individuals in England who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and had COVID-19. This comprised part of the UK government's COVID-19 response strategy, to protect those at risk of severe COVID-19 disease and death and to reduce the burden on the health system. To assess the success of this approach, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) commissioned an independent evaluation of the activities delivered by the National Health System testing programme in England. The primary purpose of this evaluation will be to capture key learnings from the roll-out of testing to different target populations via various testing services between October 2020 and March 2022 and to use these insights to formulate recommendations for future pandemic preparedness strategy. In this protocol, we detail the rationale, approach and study design. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The proposed study involves a stepwise mixed-methods approach, aligned with established methods for the evaluation of complex interventions in health, to retrospectively assess the combined impact of key asymptomatic and symptomatic testing services nationally. The research team will first develop a theory of change, formulated in collaboration with testing service stakeholders, to understand the causal pathways and intended and unintended outcomes of each testing service and explore contextual impacts on each testing service's intended outcomes. Insights gained will help identify indicators to evaluate how the combined aims of the testing programme were achieved, using a mixed-methods approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was granted ethics approval by the UKHSA Research Ethics and Governance Group (reference NR0347). All relevant ethics guidelines will be followed throughout. Findings arising from this evaluation will be used to inform lessons learnt and recommendations for UKHSA on appropriate pandemic preparedness testing programme designs; findings will also be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, a publicly available report to be published online and at academic conferences. The final report of findings from the evaluation will be used as part of a portfolio of evidence produced for the independent COVID-19 government inquiry in the UK. TRANSPARENCY DECLARATION: The lead author (the manuscript's guarantor) affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate and transparent account of the study being reported; no important aspects of the study have been omitted, and any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingPandemicsSARS-CoV-2EnglandHumansResearch DesignRetrospective StudiesCOVID-19Health policyPublic health

Identifiers

PMID38885988
PMCPMC11184184

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.