ArticlePloS one2025
Adapting COVID-19 research infrastructure to capture influenza and RSV alongside SARS-CoV-2 in UK healthcare workers winter 2022/23: Evaluation of the SIREN Winter Pressures pilot study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn winter 2022, SIREN, a prospective healthcare worker cohort study monitoring SARS-CoV-2, ran a pilot sub-study introducing multiplex PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and RSV to investigate winter pressures. Three pathways were trialled: (A) on-site (at hospital) swabbing for PCR testing, using the local laboratory for testing, (B) on-site swabbing using a UKHSA-commissioned laboratory for testing, and (C) postal swabbing using a UKHSA-commissioned laboratory for testing. Here, we compare pathways in relation to recruitment, testing coverage, participant acceptability, and UKHSA SIREN research team feedback.
methodsA mixed methods evaluation using metrics of quality assurance and study fidelity (participant recruitment and retention; multiplex PCR testing timing and coverage), an adapted NIHR 'participant in research' feedback questionnaire, and thematic analysis of a UKHSA SIREN research team workshop.
resultsWith 7,774 participants recruited, target recruitment (N = 7,500) was achieved. Thirty-nine sites took part in the sub-study (4,289 participants). Thirty-three used pathway A (3,713 participants), and six used pathway B (576 participants). 3,485 participants were enrolled into pathway C (27.8% of invitees). The median number of tests per participant was similar across pathways (6; 4; 5). However, sites using local laboratories showed a wide variation in the date they switched to multiplex testing (28th November 2022-16th March 2023). Consequently, influenza and RSV testing coverage was higher for pathways using UKHSA-commissioned laboratories (100.0% vs 45.6% at local laboratories). 1,204/7,774 (15.5%) participants completed the feedback survey. All pathways were acceptable to participants; 98.9% of postal and 97.5% of site-based participants 'would consider taking part again'.
conclusionTransitioning SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing to include influenza and RSV was challenging to achieve rapidly across multiple sites. The postal testing pathway proved more agile, and UKHSA-commissioned laboratory testing provided more comprehensive data collection than local laboratory testing. This sub-study indicates that postal protocols are effective, adaptable at pace, and acceptable to participants.
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.