Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40254311›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Influence of context on engagement with COVID-19 testing: a scoping review of barriers and facilitators to testing for healthcare workers, care homes and schools in the UK.

Billie Andersen-Waine, Claire Marriott Keene, Sophie Dickinson, Reshania Naidoo, Angus Ferguson-Lewis, Anastasia Polner, Ma'ayan Amswych, Lisa White, Sassy Molyneux, Marta Wanat and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Billie Andersen-Waine *Ernst & Young (EY) UKI Health Sciences and Wellness, London, UK, London, UK b@billieandersen.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-1280-0859
Claire Marriott Keene *Centre for Tropical Medicine & Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0875-5884
Sophie DickinsonErnst & Young (EY) UKI Health Sciences and Wellness, London, UK, London, UK.
Reshania NaidooErnst & Young (EY) UKI Health Sciences and Wellness, London, UK, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3368-0255
Angus Ferguson-LewisErnst & Young (EY) UKI Health Sciences and Wellness, London, UK, London, UK.
Anastasia PolnerErnst & Young (EY) UKI Health Sciences and Wellness, London, UK, London, UK.
Ma'ayan AmswychErnst & Young (EY) UKI Health Sciences and Wellness, London, UK, London, UK.
Lisa WhiteDepartment of Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sassy MolyneuxCentre for Tropical Medicine & Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Marta WanatNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0163-1547
EY-Oxford Health Analytics Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe UK government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic included a 'test, trace and isolate' strategy. Testing services for healthcare workers, care homes and schools accounted for the greatest spend and volume of tests. We reviewed relevant literature to identify common and unique barriers and facilitators to engaging with each of these testing services.

designScoping review. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed, Scopus and the WHO COVID-19 Research Database were searched for evidence published between 1 January 2020 and 7 November 2022. This was supplemented by evidence identified via free-text searches on Google Scholar and provided by the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted by a team of reviewers and synthesised thematically under the broad headings of perceptions, experiences, barriers and facilitators to engaging with the COVID-19 testing programme.

resultsThis study included 40 sources, including 17 from projects that informed UKHSA's decisions during the pandemic. Eight themes emerged and were used to categorise barriers and facilitators to engaging with the testing services for healthcare workers, care homes and schools: (1) perceived value, (2) trust in the tests and public bodies, (3) importance of infrastructure, (4) impact of media and social networks, (5) physical burden of the test, (6) perceived capability to undertake testing, (7) importance of relevant information and 8) consequences of testing.

conclusionsUniversal barriers and facilitators to engagement with the testing programme related to the core elements of each testing service, such as uncomfortable specimen collection and the influence of media and peers; these could be mitigated or leveraged to increase engagement across settings. However, the individuals involved, perceptions of value and available resources differed across services, leading to unique experiences between settings. Thus, consideration of context is crucial when designing and implementing a testing programme in response to a pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingHealth PersonnelNursing HomesSchoolsHumansSARS-CoV-2United KingdomBehaviorCOVID-19Health Services

Identifiers

PMID40254311
PMCPMC12010343

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.