Romo Matthew L, Zimba Rebecca, Kulkarni Sarah, Berry Amanda, You William, Mirzayi Chloe, Westmoreland Drew, Parcesepe Angela M, Waldron Levi, Rane Madhura, Kochhar Shivani, Robertson McKaylee, Maroko Andrew R, Grov Christian, Nash Denis
Institute for Implementation Science in Population Health (ISPH), City University of New York (CUNY); New York, NY, 10027 USA.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, City University of New York (CUNY); New York, NY, 10027 USA.
medRxiv. 2020 Dec 24:2020.12.22.20248747. doi: 10.1101/2020.12.22.20248747.
In order to understand preferences about SARS-CoV-2 testing, we conducted a discrete choice experiment among 4793 participants in the Communities, Households, and SARS-CoV-2 Epidemiology (CHASING COVID) Cohort Study from July 30-September 8, 2020. We used latent class analysis to identify distinct patterns of preferences related to testing and conducted a simulation to predict testing uptake if additional testing scenarios were offered. Five distinct patterns of SARS-CoV-2 testing emerged. "Comprehensive testers" (18.9%) ranked specimen type as most important and favored less invasive specimen types, with saliva most preferred, and also ranked venue and result turnaround time as highly important, with preferences for home testing and fast result turnaround time. "Fast track testers" (26.0%) ranked result turnaround time as most important and favored immediate and same day turnaround time. "Dual testers" (18.5%) ranked test type as most important and preferred both antibody and viral tests. "Non-invasive dual testers" (33.0%) ranked specimen type and test type as similarly most important, preferring cheek swab specimen type and both antibody and viral tests. "Home testers" (3.6%) ranked venue as most important and favored home-based testing. By offering less invasive (saliva specimen type), dual testing (both viral and antibody tests), and at home testing scenarios in addition to standard testing scenarios, simulation models predicted that testing uptake would increase from 81.7% to 98.1%. We identified substantial differences in preferences for SARS-CoV-2 testing and found that offering additional testing options, which consider this heterogeneity, would likely increase testing uptake.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, diagnostic testing has allowed for early detection of cases and implementation of measures to reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Understanding individuals' preferences about testing and the service models that deliver tests are relevant in efforts to increase and sustain uptake of SARS-CoV-2 testing, which, despite vaccine availability, will be required for the foreseeable future. We identified substantial differences in preferences for SARS-CoV-2 testing in a discrete choice experiment among a large national cohort of adults in the US. Offering additional testing options that account for or anticipate this heterogeneity in preferences (e.g., both viral and antibody tests, at home testing), would likely increase testing uptake.
Biological Sciences (major); Psychological and Cognitive Sciences (minor).
为了解对严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2（SARS-CoV-2）检测的偏好，我们于2020年7月30日至9月8日在美国社区、家庭与SARS-CoV-2流行病学（CHASING COVID）队列研究的4793名参与者中进行了一项离散选择实验。我们使用潜在类别分析来识别与检测相关的不同偏好模式，并进行了模拟以预测如果提供额外的检测方案，检测的接受率。出现了五种不同的SARS-CoV-2检测偏好模式。“全面检测者”（18.9%）将样本类型列为最重要因素，青睐侵入性较小的样本类型，最偏好唾液样本，还将检测地点和结果周转时间列为非常重要的因素，倾向于居家检测和快速的结果周转时间。“快速通道检测者”（26.0%）将结果周转时间列为最重要因素，青睐即时和当日周转时间。“双重检测者”（18.5%）将检测类型列为最重要因素，同时偏好抗体检测和病毒检测。“非侵入性双重检测者”（33.0%）将样本类型和检测类型列为同样重要的因素，偏好颊拭子样本类型以及抗体检测和病毒检测。“居家检测者”（3.6%）将检测地点列为最重要因素，青睐居家检测。通过除标准检测方案外还提供侵入性较小的（唾液样本类型）、双重检测（病毒检测和抗体检测）以及居家检测方案，模拟模型预测检测接受率将从81.7%提高到98.1%。我们发现对SARS-CoV-2检测的偏好存在显著差异，并发现提供考虑到这种异质性的额外检测选项可能会提高检测接受率。
在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间，诊断检测有助于早期发现病例并实施措施以减少SARS-CoV-2感染的社区传播。了解个体对检测的偏好以及提供检测的服务模式对于提高和维持SARS-CoV-2检测的接受率至关重要，在可预见的未来，尽管有疫苗可用，但检测仍将是必要的。我们在美国一个大型全国性成年人群体的离散选择实验中发现了对SARS-CoV-2检测偏好的显著差异。提供考虑或预期这种偏好异质性的额外检测选项（例如病毒检测和抗体检测、居家检测）可能会提高检测接受率。
生物科学（主要）；心理与认知科学（次要）。
