Process evaluation of the Dutch COVID-19 QR code app: an example of citizen science

Background: The Dutch Ministry of Health developed and implemented the CoronaCheck app. With the app, citizens can show proof of "non-infectivity" when traveling within the EU and to gain access to e.g. restaurants or events. The study was carried out among citizens, companies and civil society organisations. The results of were used by the Ministry for optimization. Method(s): 42 interviews and 353 questionnaires were conducted in the general population, visitors to events, managers of test lanes and employees of society organisations. Field observations were performed at 3 events. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically coded. Descriptive analyses were used for the questionnaires. Finding(s): 49% of the citizens see the added value and necessity of CoronaCheck yet 47% fear that CoronaCheck will lead to a divide in society. As the vaccination rate increases, doubts increase among respondents about the necessity of the app. The travelling distance to a testing location and the digital accessibility were bottlenecks. Companies had difficulties to find the right information. It turned out to be difficult to avoid fraud with QR codes. The interviews with civil society organisations showed that there is too little attention for low digital literate people. Conclusion(s): Citizens, companies and civil society organisations all find the concept CoronaCheck relevant. However, there are some points of interest: testing should be easily accessible, information about the control procedure and a telephone helpline should be available for organisers and the procedure should also be easily available in analogue form.

Accuracy of routine laboratory tests to predict mortality and deterioration to severe or critical COVID-19 in people with SARS-CoV-2

Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (diagnostic). The objectives are as follows:. To assess the accuracy of routine blood-based laboratory tests to predict mortality and deterioration to severe or critical (from mild or moderate) COVID-19 in people with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary objectives Where data are available, we will investigate whether prognostic accuracy varies according to a specific measurement or test, reference standard, timing of outcome verification, sample type, study design, and setting, including prevalence of the target condition (either by stratified analysis or meta-regression).

Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19: accuracy of signs and symptoms;molecular, antigen, and antibody tests;and routine laboratory markers

Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (diagnostic). The objectives are as follows:. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of laboratory real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and other laboratory molecular tests to determine if a person presenting in the community or in secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of each rapid PCR and antigen test to determine if a person presenting in the community or in secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of each antibody test to determine if a person presenting in the community or in secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection, or has previously had SARS-CoV-2 infection. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms to determine if a person presenting in the community, general practice, or at the emergency department has SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 pneumonia, or severe COVID-19 pneumonia/ARDS requiring hospital admission. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of routine laboratory testing to determine if a person has COVID-19 pneumonia or SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary objectives Where data are available, for reviews #1 to #5, we will investigate the accuracy (either by stratified analysis or meta-regression) according to: laboratory method, days of symptoms, severity of symptoms, reference standard, sample type, study design, setting;test brand and version, days of symptoms, severity of symptoms, reference standard, sample type, study design, setting;current infection or past infection, test brand and version, days of symptoms or days since symptoms resolved, reference standard, study design, setting;days of symptoms, reference standard, study design, setting;specific measurement or biomarker, days of symptoms, severity of symptoms, reference standard, sample type, study design, setting.

Imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19

Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (diagnostic). The objectives are as follows:. The primary objective is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of chest imaging (computed tomography (CT), chest X-ray and ultrasound) in the evaluation of people suspected to have COVID-19. This may also refer to specific signs, such as a particular CT finding. Secondary objectives To evaluate whether these imaging tests are sufficiently accurate to rule out COVID-19 (main measure of interest will be the negative predictive value) To evaluate the rate of positive imaging in patients with initial RT-PCR negative results who have a positive result on a follow-up RT-PCR test To determine if there is an association between number of days after symptom onset, symptom severity and the findings on chest imaging for patients with COVID-19 To determine the rate of discrepancy or agreement between CT, chest X-ray and ultrasound findings To evaluate for ‘threshold’ effects of imaging findings of COVID-19 and accuracy measures To determine the rate of alternative diagnoses identified by chest imaging.