Back

Participant Demographics and Testing Trends: A Community Pandemic Response Program

Garcia, Y. E.; Solis, L.; Daza-Torres, M. L.; Montesinos-Lopez, J. C.; Pollock, B. H.; Nuno, M.

2023-01-04 public and global health
10.1101/2023.01.02.23284119 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify demographic characteristics of test participants and changes in testing participation over time in a community pandemic-response program launched in a college town in California, USA. MethodsWe described overall testing participation, identified demographic characteristics of frequent testers, and evaluated changes in testing participation over four different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. ResultsA total of 770,165 tests were performed between November 18, 2020, and June 30, 2022, among 89,924 residents of Yolo County (41.1% of population), with significant participation from racially/ethnically diverse participants and across age groups. Most positive cases (49.9%) were captured during Omicron, which also corresponds to the period with the highest daily participation (895 per 100K population). The proportion of participants which we considered "frequent testers" (28.9% vs. 39.7%, p < 0.0001) and individuals that tested once (39.5% vs. 47.9%, p < 0.0001) increased significantly from Delta to Omicron. Women (58.8%), participants of age 19-34 years (38.8%), and White (53.2%) tested more frequently throughout the program. The proportion of tests conducted among Latinos remained steady around 18% over time, with the exception of the post-Omicron period (13%). ConclusionThe unique features of a pandemic response program that supported communitywide access to free asymptomatic testing provides a unique opportunity to evaluate adherence to testing recommendations, and testing trends over time. Identification of individual and group-level factors associated with testing behaviors is essential to improve access and protect communities at-large.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.