Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of four different strategies for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in the general population (CoV-Surv Study): study protocol for a two-factorial randomized controlled multi-arm trial with cluster sampling
Abstract
Background To achieve higher effectiveness in population-based SARS-CoV-2 surveillance and to reliably predict the course of an outbreak, screening, and monitoring of infected individuals without major symptoms (about 40% of the population) will be necessary. While current testing capacities are also used to identify such asymptomatic cases, this rather passive approach is not suitable in generating reliable population-based estimates of the prevalence of asymptomatic carriers to allow any dependable predictions on the course of the pandemic. Methods This trial implements a two-factorial, randomized, controlled, multi-arm, prospective, interventional, single-blinded design with cluster sampling and four study arms, each representing a different SARS-CoV-2 testing and surveillance strategy based on individuals’ self-collection of saliva samples which are then sent to and analyzed by a laboratory. The targeted sample size for the trial is 10,000 saliva samples equally allocated to the four study arms (2500 participants per arm). Strategies differ with respect to tested population groups (individuals vs. all household members) and testing approach (without vs. with pre-screening survey). The trial is complemented by an economic evaluation and qualitative assessment of user experiences. Primary outcomes include costs per completely screened person, costs per positive case, positive detection rate, and precision of positive detection rate. Discussion Systems for active…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 2,500 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Tobacco and COPD: presenting the World Health Organization (WHO) Tobacco Knowledge Summary
- Comparative effects of e-cigarette smoking on periodontal status, salivary pH, and cotinine levels
- Association between exposure to environmental pollutants and increased oral health risks, a comprehensive review
- Influence of gestational window on offspring vascular health in rodents with in utero exposure to electronic cigarettes
- Natural products as kinase inhibitors in lung cancer: molecular mechanisms, therapeutic potential, and clinical trials
- Nicotine in electronic cigarettes
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.