ArticleEuropean journal of public health2024
Sociodemographic differences in the response to changes in COVID-19 testing guidelines.
Article in European journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Individual and neighborhood based socioeconomic factors relevant for contact behaviour and epidemic control.Communications medicine · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Sweden emphasized voluntary guidelines over mandates. We exploited a rapid change and reversal of the Public Health Agency of Sweden's COVID-19 testing guidelines for vaccinated and recently infected individuals as a quasi-experiment to examine sociodemographic differences in the response to changes in pandemic guidelines. We analyzed daily polymerase chain reaction tests from 1 October 2021 to 15 December 2021, for vaccinated or recently infected adults (≥20 years; n = 1 596 321) from three Swedish regions (Stockholm, Örebro, and Dalarna). Using interrupted time series analysis, we estimated abrupt changes in testing rates at the two dates when the guidelines were changed (1 November and 22 November). Stratified analysis and meta-regression were employed to explore sociodemographic differences in the strength of the response to the guideline changes. Testing rates declined substantially when guideline against testing of vaccinated and recently infected individuals came into effect on 1 November [testing rate ratio: 0.50 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.41, 0.61)], and increased again from these lowered levels by a similar amount upon its reversal on 22 November [testing rate ratio: 2.19 (95% CI: 1.69, 2.85)]. Being Sweden-born, having higher household income, or higher education, were all associated with a stronger adherent response to the guideline changes. Adjusting for stratum-specific baseline testing rates and test-positivity did not influence the results. Our findings suggest that the population was responsive to the rapid changes in testing guidelines, but with clear sociodemographic differences in the strength of the response.
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.