Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043925 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043925 33455939!7813337!33455939     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 249.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 249.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 249.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 249.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       BMJ+Open 2021 ; 11 (1): e043925 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33455939|t=2021. Public s understanding of swab test results for SARS-CoV-2: an online behavioural experiment during the April 2020 lockdown |pdf=|usr=}}{{33455939}} gab.com Text Public s understanding of swab test results for SARS-CoV-2: an online behavioural experiment during the April 2020 lockdown JO: BMJ Open http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33455939 #FOAvip OBJECTIVE: Although widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2 is in place, little is known about how well the public understands these results. We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the general public's grasp of the accuracy and significance of the results of the swab test. DESIGN: Web-based behavioural experiment. SETTING: Italy during the April 2020 lockdown. PARTICIPANTS: 566 Italian residents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants' estimates of the SARS-CoV-2 prevalence; the predictive and diagnostic accuracy of the test; the behavioural impact of (positive vs negative) test results; the perceived usefulness of a short-term repetition of the test following positive or negative results; and rankings of causes for false positives and false negatives. RESULTS: Most participants considered the swab test useful (89.6%) and provided predictive values consistent with their estimates of test diagnostic accuracy and infection prevalence (67.0%). Participants acknowledged the effects of symptomatic status and geographical location on prevalence (all p<0.001) but failed to take this information into account when estimating the positive or negative predictive value. Overall, test specificity was underestimated (91.5%, 95% CI 90.2% to 92.8%); test sensitivity was overestimated (89.7%, 95% CI 88.3% to 91.0%). Positive results were evaluated as more informative than negative ones (91.6, 95% CI 90.2 to 93.1 and 41.0, 95% CI 37.9 to 44.0, respectively, p<0.001); a short-term repetition of the test was considered more useful after a positive than a negative result (62.7, 95% CI 59.6 to 65.7 and 47.2, 95% CI 44.4 to 50.0, respectively, p=0.013). Human error and technical characteristics were assessed as more likely to be the causes of false positives (p<0.001); the level of the viral load as the cause of false negatives (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While some aspects of the swab for SARS-CoV-2 are well grasped, others are not and may have a strong bearing on the general public's health and well-being. The obtained findings provide policymakers with a detailed picture that can guide the design and implementation of interventions for improving efficient communication with the general public as well as adherence to precautionary behaviour. Twit Text FOAVip Public s understanding of swab test results for SARS-CoV-2: an online behavioural experiment during the April 2020 lockdown ????BMJ Open http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33455939 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33455939 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33455939}}</ref> Public s understanding of swab test results for SARS-CoV-2: an online behavioural experiment during the April 2020 lockdown #MMPMID33455939 Pighin S; Tentori K BMJ Open 2021[Jan]; 11 (1): e043925 PMID33455939show ga OBJECTIVE: Although widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2 is in place, little is known about how well the public understands these results. We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the general public's grasp of the accuracy and significance of the results of the swab test. DESIGN: Web-based behavioural experiment. SETTING: Italy during the April 2020 lockdown. PARTICIPANTS: 566 Italian residents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants' estimates of the SARS-CoV-2 prevalence; the predictive and diagnostic accuracy of the test; the behavioural impact of (positive vs negative) test results; the perceived usefulness of a short-term repetition of the test following positive or negative results; and rankings of causes for false positives and false negatives. RESULTS: Most participants considered the swab test useful (89.6%) and provided predictive values consistent with their estimates of test diagnostic accuracy and infection prevalence (67.0%). Participants acknowledged the effects of symptomatic status and geographical location on prevalence (all p<0.001) but failed to take this information into account when estimating the positive or negative predictive value. Overall, test specificity was underestimated (91.5%, 95% CI 90.2% to 92.8%); test sensitivity was overestimated (89.7%, 95% CI 88.3% to 91.0%). Positive results were evaluated as more informative than negative ones (91.6, 95% CI 90.2 to 93.1 and 41.0, 95% CI 37.9 to 44.0, respectively, p<0.001); a short-term repetition of the test was considered more useful after a positive than a negative result (62.7, 95% CI 59.6 to 65.7 and 47.2, 95% CI 44.4 to 50.0, respectively, p=0.013). Human error and technical characteristics were assessed as more likely to be the causes of false positives (p<0.001); the level of the viral load as the cause of false negatives (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While some aspects of the swab for SARS-CoV-2 are well grasped, others are not and may have a strong bearing on the general public's health and well-being. The obtained findings provide policymakers with a detailed picture that can guide the design and implementation of interventions for improving efficient communication with the general public as well as adherence to precautionary behaviour. |Adolescent[MESH] |Adult[MESH] |Aged[MESH] |COVID-19 Testing[MESH] |COVID-19/*diagnosis/epidemiology[MESH] |Clinical Laboratory Techniques/*methods[MESH] |False Negative Reactions[MESH] |False Positive Reactions[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Italy/epidemiology[MESH] |Male[MESH] |Middle Aged[MESH] |Nasopharynx/*virology[MESH] |Predictive Value of Tests[MESH] |Prevalence[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2/*genetics[MESH] |Social Isolation[MESH] |Specimen Handling/methods[MESH]Public s understanding of swab test results for SARS-CoV-2: an online (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing