Behavioural barriers to COVID-19 testing in Australia: Two national surveys to identify barriers and estimate prevalence by health literacy level
Bonner, C.; Batcup, C.; Ayre, J.; Pickles, K.; Cvejic, E.; Copp, T.; Cornell, S.; Dodd, R.; Isautier, J.; Nickel, B.; McCaffery, K. J.
Show abstract
BackgroundCOVID-19 testing and contact tracing has been crucial in Australias prevention strategy. However, testing for COVID-19 is far from optimal, and behavioural barriers are unknown. Study 1 aimed to identify the range of barriers to testing. Study 2 aimed to estimate prevalence in a nationally relevant sample to target interventions. MethodsStudy 1: National longitudinal COVID-19 survey from April-November 2020. Testing barriers were included in the June survey (n=1369). Open responses were coded using the COM-B framework (capability-opportunity-motivation). Study 2: Barriers from Study 1 were presented to a new nationally representative sample in November to estimate prevalence (n=2869). Barrier prevalence was analysed by health literacy level using Chi square tests. ResultsStudy 1: 49% strongly agreed to get tested for symptoms, and 69% would self-isolate. Concern about pain was the top barrier from a provided list (11%), but 32 additional barriers were identified from open responses and coded to the COM-B framework. Study 2: The most prevalent barriers were motivation issues (e.g. dont believe symptoms are COVID-19: 28%, few local cases: 18%). Capability issues were also common (e.g. not sure symptoms are bad enough: 19%, not sure whether symptoms need testing: 15%). Many barriers were more prevalent amongst people with low compared to high health literacy, including motivation (preference to self isolate: 21% vs 12%, pain: 15% vs 9%) and capability (not sure symptom needs testing: 12% vs 8%, not sure how to test:11% vs 4%). ConclusionEven in a health system with free and widespread access to COVID-19 testing, motivation and capability barriers were prevalent issues, particularly for people with lower health literacy. This study highlights the important of diagnosing behaviour barriers to target public health interventions for COVID-19 and future pandemics.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Perceptions on undertaking regular asymptomatic self-testing for COVID-19 using lateral flow tests: A qualitative study of university students and staff 96%
- Psychological, social and financial impact of COVID-19 on culturally and linguistically diverse communities: a cross-sectional Australian study 95%
- Economic and social impacts of COVID-19 and public health measures: results from an anonymous online survey in Thailand, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, Italy and Slovenia 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Scoping Review of the Experience of Implementing Population Testing for SARS-CoV-2 94%
- Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation 93%
- Learning about COVID-19 across borders: Public health information and adherence among international travellers to the UK 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours among health and social care workers in the UK: a mixed-methods study 95%
- The impact of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions on the lived experiences of people living in Thailand, Malaysia, Italy and the United Kingdom: a cross-country qualitative study 94%
- COVID-19 self-testing in Nigeria: Stakeholders’ opinions and perspective on its value for case detection 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Navigating vaccination choices: The intersecting dynamics of institutional trust, belonging and message perception among Congolese migrants in the UK (A reflexive thematic analysis) 95%
- Implementing essential diagnostics-learning from essential medicines: A scoping review 93%
- COVID-19 vaccine brand hesitancy and other challenges to vaccination in the Philippines 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.