Back

Behavioural determinants of testing behaviour during a hypothetical avian influenza outbreak: an interview study

van Hoorn, R. C.; van Gestel, L. C.; Griffioen, D. S.; Petrignani, M. W.; Kersten, C.; Muskens, M.; Vols, L.; Borgdorff, H.; van der Meer, I. M.; Adriaanse, M. A.; van der Schoor, A. S.

2026-03-19 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.03.17.26348610 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAvian Influenza (AI) is a potential pandemic threat, specifically when human-to-human transmission occurs. For outbreak management testing is essential. Current knowledge on testing behaviour is mostly derived from other infectious diseases such as COVID-19. It is necessary to identify determinants of testing behaviour for AI in an early phase. Therefore, this interview study aims to identify a wide range of behavioural determinants of testing during a hypothetical human-to-human transmissible AI outbreak. MethodsSemi-structured in-depth interviews, based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, were carried out between May 2024 and February 2025. Participants were included through purposive and convenience sampling. During the interviews an animation was shown illustrating a hypothetical AI outbreak. Verbatim transcripts were thematically analysed. ResultsWe included seventeen participants (median age 44, range 20-81; 71% women) with diverse backgrounds in terms of age, gender, educational level and country of birth. We found that having the freedom to decide to test would make testing more acceptable, whereas a decreased sense of autonomy would discourage testing. Most themes included individual rather than population-level benefits as drivers of testing behaviour. These included protecting loved ones, ones own health and gaining psychological reassurance. External conditions like being unable to go to work or an event would generally encourage testing behaviour. Lower trust in governmental authorities could hamper testing behaviour. Previous experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic shaped participants answers about AI testing behaviour. ConclusionKey considerations include balancing peoples need for autonomy with the external measures imposed by employers or the government, rebuilding trust in institutions and acknowledging how prior experiences with testing may shape testing behaviour in future AI outbreaks. Further research is needed to determine how these findings can be translated into effective communication and how trust in authorities can be build.

Published in BMC Public Health (predicted rank #3) · training set

Matching journals

The top 3 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.