Table 2 Participants’ acceptance of nasal and oropharyngeal swabbing at the study center (median and range).

From: Determination of nasal and oropharyngeal microbiomes in a multicenter population-based study – findings from Pretest 1 of the German National Cohort

Items Augsburg n = 100 Bremen n = 91 Essen n = 37 Freiburg n = 94 Hamburg n = 49 Heidelberg n = 52
Nasal swab collected by study personnel       
I felt comfortable when the study personnel collected the nasal swab 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5)
I would participate again in a study in which a staff member collects a nasal swab from me 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (2–5)
Oropharyngeal swabs collected by study personnel       
I felt comfortable when the study personnel collected the oropharyngeal swab 4 (2–5) 4.5 (1–5) 4.5 (1–5) 5 (1–5)
I would participate again in a study in which a staff member collects an oropharyngeal swab from me 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 5 (1–5)
Nasal swabbing collected by the study participants       
I felt comfortable when I collected the self-swab at home 5 (1–5) 5 (2–5) 5 (1–5)
I would rather conduct a nasal self-swab by myself than having it taken by study personnel 4 (1–5) 3 (1–5) 3 (1–5)
It was easy to collect the nasal self-swab 5 (1–5) 5 (3–5) 5 (1–5)
The instructions how to collect the self-swab were easy to understand 4 (1–5) 5 (1–5) 4 (1–5)
I would participate again in a study in which I self-collect a nasal swab 5 (1–5) 5 (2–5) 5 (1–5)
  1. A 5-point Likert scale was used; 1 = strong disagreement, 2 = disagreement, 3 = neither agreement nor disagreement, 4 = agreement, and 5 = strong agreement.