Observational studyFrontiers in public health2025
A descriptive study on feasibility of nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab collection from pediatric research participants in Cebu, Philippines.
Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nasopharyngeal (NPS) and oropharyngeal (OPS) swab collection are vital in the diagnosis and surveillance of respiratory viruses. However, the acceptability of these procedures among children remains a challenge. Methods: We conducted a descriptive study using data from two pediatric observational studies in Cebu, Philippines (July 2021-October 2022). One was a community-based study, involving febrile adolescents aged 13-19 years, and the other was a hospital-based study, involving febrile children aged 1 month to <5 years. Both studies aimed to collect NPS/OPS samples for respiratory pathogen testing, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B, and respiratory syncytial virus. We described reasons for refusal of NPS/OPS collection obtained from parents or guardians who were approached for participation in these studies. Results: Among 180 children enrolled from study sites in Bogo and Balamban Cebu, 134 (74.4%) were from the community-based study and 46 (25.6%) from the hospital-based study. Twenty-nine (29/180; 16.1%) agreed to undergo NPS/OPS collection-all of whom were from the community-based study. None of the hospital-based participants agreed to undergo NPS/OPS collection as part of their participation in the study. Among the 151/180 (83.90%) participants who refused the research swab collection, 41 (27.2%) declined due to a prior swab, 31 (20.5%) cited fear or discomfort, and 28 (18.5%) felt it was unnecessary at the time. Conclusion: NPS/OPS collection was less acceptable in both community and hospital settings, unless mandated by local authorities based on the experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior swabbing, procedural discomfort, and perceived lack of necessity were key barriers, especially among younger children and their caregivers.
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.