IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i21p11078-d661654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increased COVID-19 Testing Rates Following Combined Door-to-Door and Mobile Testing Facility Campaigns in Oslo, Norway, a Difference-in-Difference Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kristin Hestmann Vinjerui

    (Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, 0213 Oslo, Norway)

  • Ingeborg Hess Elgersma

    (Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, 0213 Oslo, Norway)

  • Atle Fretheim

    (Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, 0213 Oslo, Norway
    Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, 0130 Oslo, Norway)

Abstract

High testing rates limit COVID-19 transmission. Attempting to increase testing rates, Stovner District in Oslo, Norway, combined door-to-door campaigns with easy access testing facilities. We studied the intervention’s impact on COVID-19 testing rates. The Stovner District administration executed three door-to-door campaigns promoting COVID-19 testing accompanied by drop-in mobile COVID-19 testing facilities in different areas at 2-week intervals. We calculated testing rates pre- and post-campaigns using data from the Norwegian emergency preparedness register for COVID-19 (Beredt C19). We applied a difference-in-difference approach using ordinary least square regression models and robust standard errors to estimate changes in COVID-19 testing rates. Door-to-door visits reached around one of three households. Intervention and comparison areas had identical testing rates before the intervention, and we observed an increase in intervention areas after the campaigns. We estimate a 43% increase in testing rates over the first three days following the door-to-door campaigns ( p = 0.28), corresponding to an additional 79 (95% confidence interval, −54 to 175) people tested. Considering the shape of the time series curves and the large effect estimate, we find it highly likely that the campaigns had a substantial positive impact on COVID-19 testing rates, despite a p -value above the conventional levels for statistical significance. The results and the feasibility of the intervention suggest that it may be worth implementing in similar settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristin Hestmann Vinjerui & Ingeborg Hess Elgersma & Atle Fretheim, 2021. "Increased COVID-19 Testing Rates Following Combined Door-to-Door and Mobile Testing Facility Campaigns in Oslo, Norway, a Difference-in-Difference Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11078-:d:661654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11078/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11078/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goodman-Bacon, Andrew & Marcus, Jan, 2020. "Using Difference-in-Differences to Identify Causal Effects of COVID-19 Policies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 14(2), pages 153-158.
    2. David Roodman & James G. MacKinnon & Morten Ørregaard Nielsen & Matthew D. Webb, 2019. "Fast and wild: Bootstrap inference in Stata using boottest," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 19(1), pages 4-60, March.
    3. A. Colin Cameron & Douglas L. Miller, 2015. "A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(2), pages 317-372.
    4. Andrew Goodman-Bacon & Jan Marcus, 2020. "Difference-in-Differences to Identify Causal Effects of COVID-19 Policies," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1870, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Backhaus, Andreas, 2022. "International travel in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of German school breaks," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    2. Alexander Ahammer & Martin Halla & Mario Lackner, 2023. "Mass gatherings contributed to early COVID‐19 mortality: Evidence from US sports," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(3), pages 471-488, July.
    3. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    4. Ilan Noy & Toshihiro Okubo & Eric Strobl, 2023. "The Japanese textile sector and the influenza pandemic of 1918–1920," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(5), pages 1192-1227, November.
    5. Rik Chakraborti & Gavin Roberts, 2023. "How price-gouging regulation undermined COVID-19 mitigation: county-level evidence of unintended consequences," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 51-83, July.
    6. Jules Gazeaud & Victor Stephane, 2023. "Productive Workfare? Evidence from Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 265-290, January.
    7. James G. MacKinnon & Morten Ørregaard Nielsen & Matthew D. Webb, 2023. "Fast and reliable jackknife and bootstrap methods for cluster‐robust inference," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(5), pages 671-694, August.
    8. Gric, Zuzana & Ehrenbergerova, Dominika & Hodula, Martin, 2022. "The power of sentiment: Irrational beliefs of households and consumer loan dynamics," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    9. Maria Rosaria Alfano & Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene, 2023. "Eppur si muove: an evaluation of museum policy reform in Italy," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 47(1), pages 97-131, March.
    10. Natalia Danzer & Mathias Huebener & Astrid Pape & C. Katharina Spieß & Nico A. Siegel & Gert G. Wagner, 2021. "Cracking under Pressure? Gender Role Attitudes toward Maternal Employment in Times of a Pandemic," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1951, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    11. Mathias Huebener & Sevrin Waights & C. Katharina Spiess & Nico A. Siegel & Gert G. Wagner, 2021. "Parental well-being in times of Covid-19 in Germany," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 91-122, March.
    12. Bietenbeck, Jan & Leibing, Andreas & Marcus, Jan & Weinhardt, Felix, 2023. "Tuition fees and educational attainment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    13. Wenjie Wang & Yichong Zhang, 2021. "Wild Bootstrap for Instrumental Variables Regressions with Weak and Few Clusters," Papers 2108.13707, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    14. Damian Clarke & Kathya Tapia-Schythe, 2021. "Implementing the panel event study," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 21(4), pages 853-884, December.
    15. James G. MacKinnon, 2019. "How cluster‐robust inference is changing applied econometrics," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 851-881, August.
    16. Bloem, Jeffrey R. & Salemi, Colette, 2021. "COVID-19 and conflict," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    17. Meinhofer, Angélica & Witman, Allison E. & Hinde, Jesse M. & Simon, Kosali, 2021. "Marijuana liberalization policies and perinatal health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    18. Rocha, Fabiana & Diaz, Maria Dolores Montoya & Pereda, Paula Carvalho & Árabe, Isadora Bousquat & Cavalcanti, Filipe & Lordemus, Samuel & Kreif, Noemi & Moreno-Serra, Rodrigo, 2024. "COVID-19 and violence against women: Current knowledge, gaps, and implications for public policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    19. Brodeur, Abel & Cook, Nikolai & Wright, Taylor, 2021. "On the effects of COVID-19 safer-at-home policies on social distancing, car crashes and pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    20. Brian Fabo & Martina Jancokova & Elisabeth Kempf & Lubos Pastor, 2020. "Fifty Shades of QE: Conflicts of Interest in Economic Research," Working Papers 2020-128, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11078-:d:661654. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.