Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42351092›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2026

Behavioural determinants of testing behaviour during a hypothetical human-to-human avian influenza outbreak: an interview study.

Rosa C van Hoorn, Laurens C van Gestel, Diana Harteveld-Griffioen, Mariska W F Petrignani, Coco Kersten, Margriet Müskens, Laura Vols, Hanneke Borgdorff, Irene M van der Meer, Marieke A Adriaanse and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Rosa C van HoornInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands. rosa.vanhoorn@ggdhaaglanden.nl.
Laurens C van GestelHealth, medical and neuropsychology unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Diana Harteveld-GriffioenInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Mariska W F PetrignaniInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Coco KerstenInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Margriet MüskensInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Laura VolsInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Hanneke BorgdorffDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care Campus The Hague, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Irene M van der MeerEpidemiology and policy advice department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Marieke A AdriaanseHealth, medical and neuropsychology unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Adriënne S van der SchoorInfectious disease department, Public Health Service Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands.

Funding

Zon Mw 10710032310014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAvian Influenza (AI) is a potential pandemic threat, specifically when human-to-human transmission occurs. In order to mitigate potential outbreaks amongst humans, testing is essential. l. It is necessary to identify determinants of testing behaviour for AI in an early phase, as current knowledge on testing behaviour is mostly derived from other infectious diseases such as COVID-19. Therefore, this interview study aims to identify a wide range of behavioural determinants of diagnostic testing during a hypothetical human-to-human transmissible AI outbreak.

methodsSemi-structured in-depth interviews, based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, were carried out between May 2024 and February 2025. Participants were included through purposive and convenience sampling. During the interviews an animation was shown illustrating a hypothetical AI outbreak. Verbatim transcripts were thematically analysed.

resultsWe included seventeen participants (median age 44, range 20-81; 71% women) with diverse backgrounds in terms of age, gender, educational level and country of birth. Results show that, in this hypothetical setting, having the choice to test increases acceptance of testing, whereas a decreased sense of autonomy discourages testing. Most themes included individual rather than population-level benefits as drivers of testing behaviour. These included protecting loved ones, one's own health and gaining psychological reassurance. External conditions such as being unable to go to work or an event would generally encourage testing behaviour. Lower trust in governmental authorities could hamper testing behaviour. Previous experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic shaped participants' answers about AI testing behaviour.

conclusionKey considerations include balancing people's need for autonomy with the external measures imposed by employers or the government, rebuilding trust in institutions and acknowledging how prior experiences with testing may shape testing behaviour in future AI outbreaks. Further research is needed to determine how these findings can be translated into effective communication and how trust in authorities can be built.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksInfluenza, HumanInfluenza in BirdsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnimalsCOVID-19FemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchYoung AdultAvian influenzaCommunicable diseasesCOVID-19Infection ControlInfluenza A virusPandemic preparednessPublic healthTesting

Identifiers

PMID42351092
PMCPMC13651048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.