ArticlePublic health action2025
Decision-makers' perspectives on the implementation of COVID-19 self-testing in Mozambique.
Article in Public health action, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo inform future decision-making on pandemic preparedness for COVID-19, we evaluated the acceptability and perceived feasibility of implementation strategies for COVID-19 self-testing among decision-makers in Mozambique. National and provincial directors, heads of programs and division chiefs were selected as decision-makers.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with decision-makers involved in COVID-19 diagnosis, management, and policy development. Topics included knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19, testing policies, implementation considerations, and linkage to care. Using a thematic approach, we analysed the interviews.
resultsSeventeen decision-makers were interviewed - most perceived self-testing as an acceptable strategy for early COVID-19 detection. The benefits were improved access to testing, decongesting health facilities, minimising infection risk and decreasing healthcare workers' workload. Concerns included low testing interest in the post-pandemic period, literacy barriers, affordability and equity issues, mistrust that patients might not take the test due to fear of positive results, and the healthcare system's capacity to follow up positive cases.
conclusionCOVID-19 self-testing is feasible and acceptable to decision-makers; however, the changing epidemiology has shifted perspectives. This study highlights self-testing's value in emergencies and pandemic preparedness, enabling rapid detection and isolation of cases, thus minimising the spread of infectious diseases in vulnerable populations in Mozambique and similar contexts.
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.