Abstract
Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to the swift introduction of population testing programmes in many countries across the world, using testing modalities such as drive-through, walk-through, mobile and home visiting programmes. Here, we provide an overview of the literature describing the experience of implementing population testing for SARS-CoV-2.
Methods We conducted a scoping review using Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Library in addition to a grey literature search. We identified indicators relevant to process, quality and resource outcomes related to each testing modality.
Results 2,999 titles were identified from the academic literature and the grey literature search, of which 22 were relevant. Most studies were from the USA and the Republic of Korea. Drive-through testing centres were the most common testing modality evaluated and these provided a rapid method of testing whilst minimising resource use.
Conclusions The evidence base for population testing lacks high quality studies, however, the literature provides evaluations of the advantages and limitations of different testing modalities. There is a need for robust evidence in this area to ensure that testing is deployed in a safe and effective manner in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This review was part-funded by Public Health England
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
No ethical approval was needed
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
N/A
