ArticleSSM. Qualitative research in health2026
COVID-19 rapid testing in a homeless shelter: Lessons for equitable access and sustainable pandemic response.
Article in SSM. Qualitative research in 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People experiencing homelessness (PEH) faced heightened vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet little is known about how frontline homelessness service organizations navigated the public health responsibilities that shifted onto them as broader systems strained. This study provides a longitudinal qualitative analysis of on-site rapid COVID-19 testing implemented at a large Midwestern homeless shelter, examining how multi-level structural conditions shaped the feasibility, ethics, and sustainability of testing over the course of the pandemic. Using semi-structured interviews with shelter guests (n = 42) and staff (n = 12) alongside document and policy timeline analyses (March 2020-January 2023), we conducted reflexive thematic analysis guided by a socioecological framework. Findings show that on-site rapid testing reduced longstanding barriers to care for PEH, offered reassurance in a high-risk environment, and enabled timely outbreak control. However, limited isolation capacity, rapidly evolving guidance, and the withdrawal of external resources generated significant operational and ethical challenges. As federal, state, and local supports diminished, responsibility for disease mitigation increasingly shifted onto the shelter, revealing the institutional precarity of social service agencies that were pushed into assuming public health responsibilities despite lacking the infrastructure to sustain them. Ultimately, shelter leadership discontinued on-site rapid testing after determining that continued isolation and outbreak management were incompatible with the organization's mission and physical constraints. This study demonstrates that while rapid testing can advance health equity for structurally vulnerable populations, sustainability requires coordinated policy frameworks, dedicated resources, and recognition of the limits of frontline service organizations. These findings have implications for designing effective and equitable public health responses beyond COVID-19.
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.