ArticleImplementation science communications2024
"You know, it feels like you can trust them": mixed methods implementation research to inform the scale up of a health disparities-responsive COVID-19 school testing program.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth disparities lead to negative COVID-19 outcomes for Hispanic/Latino communities. Rapid antigen testing was an important mitigation tool for protecting schools and their communities as in-person learning resumed. Within the context of a 3-middle-school non-inferiority trial we assessed acceptability and appropriateness of at-home and school-based COVID-19 antigen testing and implementation barriers and facilitators to facilitate district-wide scale up.
methodsGuided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and acceptability and appropriateness implementation outcomes, we collected post-implementation qualitative (n = 30) and quantitative (n = 454) data in English and Spanish from trial participants, in-depth feedback sessions among program implementers (n = 19) and coded 137 project meeting minutes. Verbatim transcripts were thematically analyzed. We used multivariate linear models to evaluate program acceptability and appropriateness by COVID-19 testing modality and mixed qualitative and quantitative findings for interpretation.
resultsQuestionnaire respondents closely matched school demographics (> 80% Hispanic/Latino and 8% Filipino/Asian Pacific Islander). While both testing modalities were rated as highly acceptable and appropriate, at-home testing was consistently favorable. Qualitative findings provided actionable areas for at-home testing program refinement, guiding district-wide scale up including: maintaining a learning climate to accommodate modifications as guidelines changed, needs of the school community, and implementation challenges; ensuring an engaged school leadership and sufficient human resources; improving educational communication about COVID-19 and technology ease of use; and increased time for pre-implementation planning and engagement.
conclusionsResults underscore the value of the CFIR to inform program implementation, particularly programs to reduce disparities during a public health emergency. Results support optimal testing implementation strategies centering the needs and perspectives of Hispanic/Latinos.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.