Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
Date Submitted: Nov 12, 2024
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 18, 2024 - Jan 13, 2025
Date Accepted: May 19, 2025
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Patterns of COVID-19 Testing Preferences in Rural Underserved Populations
ABSTRACT
Background:
A particular challenge during the Covid-19 pandemic was to provide testing and treatment for already disadvantaged and vulnerable populations. Media reports suggested socioeconomic and racial disparities in access to testing. Many states implemented testing in a sporadic and disorganized way and it is unclear to what extent this disproportionally affected populations experienced barriers to accessing care. It is also unclear that if potential barriers to testing were due to systemic challenges or whether there were underlying individuals motivations for not getting tested.
Objective:
The objective of this study was to understand the trade-offs individuals in rural and vulnerable populations make between attributes of individual diagnostic testing and how preferences and trade-offs vary across individuals.
Methods:
We used a mixed methods approach, first conducting focus groups to identify barriers to COVID-19 testing and then identifying optimal strategies to increase testing using hypothetical scenarios by developing a Discrete Choice Experiment. We analyzed the data using a conditional logit model (CL) and using latent class analysis (LC).
Results:
We found that respondents cared about select structural factors, but that these were not the primary drivers of choice for testing. We also found that the attributes of testing were all significant in the CL model, apart from home visit and walk in, and had the expected signs. However, when taking a closer look at preference heterogeneity and unobserved preferences, we concluded that some important covariates were driving preferences, including: age, gender, medical vulnerability, insurance status, trust in government organizations, and previous flu vaccination -which may be a proxy for compliance. In sum, these covariates helped explain the observed preference heterogeneity. Contrary to our hypotheses, rurality did not significantly impact preferences for testing.
Conclusions:
The results suggest that important social, behavioral and even policy factors affect choice for testing. Contrary to our hypotheses, rurality did not significantly impact preferences for testing, but attitudes towards government and other beliefs did. Health care interventions intended to reduce rural health disparities that do not reflect the underlying values of individuals in those subpopulations are unlikely to be successful.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.