ArticleRevista de saude publica2026
Acceptability of Covid-19 self-testing among Primary Health Care users.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2026. 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.
- TQT-Covid-19 Study: coping strategies and lessons learned for the future.Revista de saude publica · 2026Article
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
objectiveTo identify factors associated with the acceptability of Covid-19 self-testing among socioeconomically vulnerable populations.
methodsCross-sectional study using data from the "TQT Covid-19" project, which involved users from 19 primary health care (PHC) units located in socioeconomically vulnerable areas in Salvador (BA) and Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brazil. Data were collected between July 2022 and July 2023. Descriptive analysis of Covid-19 self-test acceptability was performed, and logistic regression models were used to estimate factors associated with acceptability, with respective 95% confidence intervals (95%CI).
resultsAmong 7,939 study participants, 45.8% (95%CI 44.75-46.95) reported willingness to use a Covid-19 self-test. In the analysis of associated factors, regarding sociodemographic profile, non-Black individuals (ORa = 1.17; 95%CI 1.02-1.34), cisgender men (ORa = 1.23; 95%CI 1.12-1.37), and participants with higher educational levels (ORa = 1.60; 95%CI 1.43-1.79) were more likely to accept the self-test. Those with prior knowledge of the self-test (ORa = 2.33; 95%CI 2.11-2.58) and those previously diagnosed with Covid-19 (ORa = 1.17; 95%CI 1.05-1.28) also reported higher acceptance.
conclusionsProvision of Covid-19 self-testing should be considered as a complement to testing within the public health system, especially due to its acceptance among vulnerable populations and the difficulties in accessing testing in many Brazilian regions. During periods of increased Covid-19 incidence, self-testing may serve as an important strategy for mass case detection, provided that access and knowledge are expanded so communities can play an active role in SARS-CoV-2 epidemiological surveillance.
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.