ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2024
Children and adolescents' experiences of mandatory SARS-CoV-2 testing in schools: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPublic health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic had dramatic consequences for children and adolescents. However, policy-makers and healthcare researchers did not give sufficient weight to children's perspectives. One common public health measure was mandatory SARS-CoV-2 tests in schools. This study examines the evaluation of such mandatory testing.
methodsWe investigated the effects of test type (pooled PCR tests vs antigen rapid tests) and demographic and psychological factors on evaluations of the experience of being tested. A total of 569 children (8-17 years) in two major German cities completed online questionnaires between October and December 2021. Participants answered questions addressing test evaluation, vaccination status, pandemic-related stress, mental health difficulties and health-related quality of life.
resultsOur results showed that overall test ratings were better for pooled PCR tests (p<0.001). Vaccine-willing students evaluated SARS-CoV-2 tests more positively than vaccine-unwilling students, regardless of test type (p<0.001). Children with mental health difficulties (abnormal/borderline Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) scores) evaluated SARS-CoV-2 tests more negatively than children with normal SDQ scores (p<0.001). Additionally, children who reported better health-related quality of life and children with less pandemic-related stress rated the tests more positively.
conclusionsOur results suggest that there are differences in the appraisal of the test types and that specific subgroups' experiences of regular testing vary. Our study provides insights for policy-makers in future pandemics and raises questions regarding parallels between testing and vaccination hesitancy. Moreover, our study demonstrates the feasibility and value of collecting data directly from a large cohort of children in order to understand their experiences.
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.