"This illness diminishes me. What it does is like theft" : A qualitative meta-synthesis of people's experiences of living with asthma

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This review was funded through a Seed Grant from the Centre for Research Excellence in Severe Asthma, Australia. The Healthtalk resources included in the systematic review were produced by two of the co-authors on the systematic review (SK and LL). LL is supported by NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Tiered restrictions for COVID-19 in England: knowledge, motivation to adhere and self-reported behaviour

Objectives: To test whether public knowledge and confidence in one’s understanding of the local restrictions, motivation to adhere, and self-reported behaviour differed according to tier level. / Design: Cross-sectional nationally representative online survey of 1728 participants living in England (data collection: 26 to 28 October 2020). / Methods: We conducted logistic regression analyses to investigate whether knowledge of restrictions, confidence in knowledge of restrictions, motivation to adhere to restrictions, and self-reported behaviour were associated with personal characteristics and tier. / Results: Between 81% (tier 2) and 89% (tier 3) of participants correctly identified which tier they lived in. Knowledge of specific restrictions was variable. 73% were confident they understood which tier was in place in their local area, while 71% were confident they understood the guidance in their local area. Confidence was associated with being older and living in a less deprived area. 73% were motivated to adhere to restrictions imposed for their local area. Motivation was associated with being female and older. People living in tiers with greater restrictions were less likely to report going out to meet people from another household; reported rates of going out for exercise and for work did not differ. / Conclusions: While recognition of local tier level was high, knowledge of specific guidance for tiers was variable. There was some indication that nuanced guidance (e.g. behaviour allowed in some settings but not others) was more poorly understood than guidance which was absolute (i.e. behaviour is either allowed or not allowed)

How has the emergence of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern influenced worry, perceived risk, and behaviour in the UK? A series of cross-sectional surveys

Objectives: To investigate: changes in beliefs and behaviours following news of the Omicron variant and changes to guidance; understanding of Omicron-related guidance; and factors associated with engaging with protective behaviours. Design: Series of cross-sectional surveys (1 November to 16 December 2021, 5 waves of data collection). / Setting: Online. / Participants: People living in England, aged 16 years or over (n=1622 to 1902 per wave). / Primary and secondary outcome measures: Levels of worry and perceived risk, and engagement with key behaviours (out-of-home activities, risky social mixing, wearing a face covering, and testing uptake). / Results: Beliefs about worry and perceived risk of COVID-19 fluctuated over time, with worry, perceived risk to self and perceived risk to people increasing slightly around the time of the announcement about Omicron. Understanding of the new rules in England was low, with people over-estimating the stringency of the new rules. Rates of wearing a face covering increased over time, as did testing uptake. Meeting up with people from another household decreased around the time of the announcement of Omicron (29 November to 1 December), but then returned to previous levels. Associations with engagement with protective behaviours was investigated using regression analyses. There was no evidence for significant associations between out-of-home activity and worry or perceived risk (COVID-19 generally or Omicron-specific). Engaging in highest risk social mixing and always wearing a face covering in hospitality venues were associated with worry and perceived risk about COVID-19. Always wearing a face covering in shops was associated with having heard more about Omicron. / Conclusions: Almost two years into the COVID-19 outbreak, the emergence of a novel variant of concern only slightly influenced worry and perceived risk. The main protective behaviour (wearing a face covering) promoted by new guidance showed significant re-uptake, but other protective behaviours showed little or no change

Do members of the public think they should use lateral flow tests or PCR tests when they have COVID-19-like symptoms?

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate public use of lateral flow tests (LFT) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when experiencing key COVID-19 symptoms. Study design: In this study, data from two waves of a cross-sectional nationally representative online survey (data collected 1 and 2 June, and 14 and 15 June 2021; n = 3665 adults aged ≥18 years living in England or Scotland) were used. / Methods: We report data investigating which type of test, if any, the public think Government guidance asks people to use if they have COVID-19 symptoms. In people with key COVID-19 symptoms (high temperature / fever; new, continuous cough; loss of sense of smell; loss of taste), we also describe the uptake of testing, if any. / Results: Ten percent of respondents thought Government guidance stated that they should take an LFT if symptomatic, whereas 18% of people thought that they should take a PCR test; 60% of people thought they should take both types of test (12% did not select either option). In people who were symptomatic, 32% reported taking a test to confirm whether they had COVID-19. Of these, 53% reported taking a PCR test and 44% reported taking an LFT. / Conclusions: Despite Government guidance stating that anyone with key COVID-19 symptoms should complete a PCR test, a significant percentage of the population use LFT tests when symptomatic. Communications should emphasise the superiority of, and need for, PCR tests in people with symptoms