How best do we engage the general population in testing for COVID-19?

Watson, Daniella; Baralle, Natalia Laverty; Alagil, Jawahr; Anil, Krithika; Ciccognani, Sandy; Dewar-Haggart, Rachel; Fearn, Sarah; Groot, Julia; Knowles, Kathryn; Meagher, Claire; McGrath, Carmel; Muir, Sarah; Musgrove, Jo; Glyn-Owen, Kate; Woods-Townsend, Kathryn; Mortimore, Andrew; Roderick, Paul; Baird, Janis; Inskip, Hazel; Godfrey, Keith M.; Barker, Mary

doi:10.1101/2021.01.29.21250730

Cited by 7 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another barrier was concern about taking a lateral flow test, which included the concerns that tests were being used to collect personal data, the potential health risks from the tests, discomfort of testing, and perception that taking a test twice a week was not normal and concerns over how long this would last. This is in-line with previous research that has identified concerns about use of personal data and discomfort of swabbing as barriers to testing [7,18].…”

Section: Barriers To Testingsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Lack of support for those self-isolating has also been identified as a barrier to testing in previous research [6,7], and therefore financial support should be provided to everyone who needs to self-isolate, in order to encourage uptake of testing [19].…”

Section: Barriers To Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In mass weekly testing in Southampton, high-levels of communication, trust and convenience resulted in improved engagement with testing. Those who did not get tested reported reasons such as mistrust over personal data, the potential loss of money due to a positive test, and the environmental impact of tests [7]. Additionally, in asymptomatic testing of students at the University of Nottingham, facilitators to getting tested included desire to control the virus and the experience of taking a test being quick, whereas barriers TWICE-WEEKLY TESTING 3 included guilt about the impact on others (e.g., others having to isolate) and the mental health impact of isolation [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The social media response to twice-weekly mass asymptomatic testing in England

Dennis

Robin

Carter

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundFrom 9th April 2021, everyone in England has been encouraged to take two COVID-19 tests per week. This is the first time that national mass asymptomatic testing has been introduced in the UK and the effectiveness of the policy depends on uptake with testing and willingness to self-isolate following a positive test result. This paper examines attitudes towards twice-weekly testing, as well as barriers and facilitators to engaging in testing.MethodsBetween 5th April and 28th May 2021 we searched Twitter, Facebook, and online news articles with publicly available comment sections to identify comments relating to twice-weekly testing. We identified 5783 comments which were then analysed using a framework analysis.ResultsWe identified nine main themes. Five themes related to barriers to engaging in testing: low perceived risk from COVID-19; mistrust in the government; concern about taking a test; perceived ineffectiveness of twice-weekly testing policy; and perceived negative impact of twice-weekly testing policy. Four themes related to facilitators to engaging in testing: wanting to protect others; positive perceptions of tests; a desire to return to normal; and perceived efficacy for reducing asymptomatic transmission.ConclusionsOverall, the comments identified indicated predominately negative attitudes towards the twice weekly testing policy. Several recommendations can be made to improve engagement with twice weekly testing, including: 1) communicate openly and honestly about the purpose of testing; 2) provide information about the accuracy of tests; 3) provide financial support for those required to self-isolate, and; 4) emphasise accessibility of testing.

show abstract

Section: Barriers To Testingsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Barriers To Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The social media response to twice-weekly mass asymptomatic testing in England

Dennis

Robin

Carter

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Negative peer pressure was also a recurrent theme in studies involving student participants, since students are keenly aware that a positive test result will require peers (and often members of a shared household) to self-isolate [27,38]. Consistent with the above findings, a range of studies found that endorsements from and/or solidarity with peers, families, and supportive institutional cultures encourage testing [23,24,26,32,33]. This was especially true in institutional settings (e.g., schools and GP surgeries), where participants' decisions to engage in a pilot project were 'influenced by a pull on their sense of community' [24] (p. 9) and the feeling that they were 'in it together' [23] (p. 22) There is some ambiguity about the relative influence of negative and positive pressure in these studies, however, since participants were also reported to fear the stigma associated with a positive test result [24].…”

Section: Logistics Of Testingmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…4.1.4. Social Solidarity, Peer-Pressure, and Stigma Social pressure (e.g., relating to the expected reactions of employers, friends, and family to an individual's decision to seek testing or test result) was a sub-focus of 14 studies in this review [23,24,26,27,32,33,38,40,45,46,48,54,67]. Six studies focused on negative pressure from employers and peers [38,40,45,46] or stigma [54,67] as barriers to testing.…”

Section: Logistics Of Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behavior Related to COVID-19 Testing: A Rapid Scoping Review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testing programs for COVID-19 depend on the voluntary actions of members of the public for their success. Understanding people’s knowledge, attitudes, and behavior related to COVID-19 testing is, therefore, key to the design of effective testing programs worldwide. This paper reports on the findings of a rapid scoping review to map the extent, characteristics, and scope of social science research on COVID-19 testing and identifies key themes from the literature. Main findings include the discoveries that people are largely accepting of testing technologies and guidelines and that a sense of social solidarity is a key motivator of testing uptake. The main barriers to accessing and undertaking testing include uncertainty about eligibility and how to access tests, difficulty interpreting symptoms, logistical issues including transport to and from test sites and the discomfort of sample extraction, and concerns about the consequences of a positive result. The review found that existing research was limited in depth and scope. More research employing longitudinal and qualitative methods based in under-resourced settings and examining intersections between testing and experiences of social, political, and economic vulnerability is needed. Last, the findings of this review suggest that testing should be understood as a social process that is inseparable from processes of contact tracing and isolation and is embedded in people’s everyday routines, livelihoods and relationships.

show abstract

Psychological Predictors of Self-reported COVID-19 Outcomes: Results From a Prospective Cohort Study

Ayling

Coupland

Chalder

et al. 2022

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Previous research has shown that psychological factors, such as stress and social support, are associated with greater susceptibility to viral respiratory illnesses and more severe symptoms. During the COVID-19 pandemic there has been a well-documented deterioration in psychological well-being and increased social isolation. This raises questions as to whether those experiencing psychological adversity during the pandemic are more at risk of contracting and/or experiencing COVID-19 symptoms. Purpose To examine the relationship between psychological factors and the risk of COVID-19 self-reported infection and the symptomatic experience of SARS-CoV-2 (indicated by the number and severity of symptoms). Methods As part of a longitudinal prospective observational cohort study, 1,087 adults completed validated measures of psychological well-being during April 2020 and self-reported incidence of COVID-19 infection and symptom experience across the pandemic through to December 2020. Regression models were used to explore these relationships controlling for demographic and occupational factors. Results Greater psychological distress during the early phase of the pandemic was significantly associated with subsequent self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as the experience of a greater number and more severe symptoms. Conclusions COVID-19 infection and symptoms may be more common among those experiencing elevated psychological distress. Further research to elucidate the mechanisms underlying these associations is needed.

show abstract

How best do we engage the general population in testing for COVID-19?

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

The social media response to twice-weekly mass asymptomatic testing in England

The social media response to twice-weekly mass asymptomatic testing in England

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behavior Related to COVID-19 Testing: A Rapid Scoping Review

Psychological Predictors of Self-reported COVID-19 Outcomes: Results From a Prospective Cohort Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About