ArticleBMC public health2009
Use of diagnostic self-tests on body materials among Internet users in the Netherlands: prevalence and correlates of use.
Article in BMC public health, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of a web-based decision aid on the intention to diagnostic self-testing for cholesterol and diabetes: a randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2014Trial
- A single-blind randomised controlled trial of the effects of a web-based decision aid on self-testing for cholesterol and diabetes. Study protocol.BMC public health · 2012Trial
- Should Commercial Diagnostic Testing Be Stimulated or Discouraged? Analyzing Willingness-to-Pay and Market Externalities of Three Commercial Diagnostic Tests in The Netherlands.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Article
- Article
- Public's Willingness to Perform COVID-19 Self-Testing During the Transition to the Endemic Phase in Malaysia - A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Article
- Towards a decision aid for self-tests: Users' experiences in The Netherlands.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Article
- Evaluation and enumeration of online test providers for sexually transmitted infections, specifically chlamydia, in the Netherlands.Sexually transmitted infections · 2019Article
- Observational
- Psychological, situational and application-related determinants of the intention to self-test: a factorial survey among students.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Article
- Diabetes self-management arrangements in Europe: a realist review to facilitate a project implemented in six countries.BMC health services research · 2014Review
- Quality and use of consumer information provided with home test kits: room for improvement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2014Article
- Motivation and experiences of self-testers regarding tests for cardiovascular risk factors.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2014Article
- A review of self-testing for HIV: research and policy priorities in a new era of HIV prevention.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2013Review
- Cardiometabolic prevention consultation in the Netherlands: screening uptake and detection of cardiometabolic risk factors and diseases--a pilot study.BMC family practice · 2013Article
- Home diagnostic tests in the state of Qatar: a snapshot of public views, level of awareness and use.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2012Article
- One risk assessment tool for cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and chronic kidney disease.Diabetes care · 2012Article
- To test or not to test: a cross-sectional survey of the psychosocial determinants of self-testing for cholesterol, glucose, and HIV.BMC public health · 2011Article
- How do people respond to self-test results? A cross-sectional survey.BMC family practice · 2010Article
- Improving behaviour in self-testing (IBIS): Study on frequency of use, consequences, information needs and use, and quality of currently available consumer information (protocol).BMC public health · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA range of self-tests on body materials has become available to the general public, but the extent of their use has hardly been studied. This study examined how many people use diagnostic self-tests on body materials such as blood or urine, as well as the type of tests that are used, and factors associated with their use.
methodsCross-sectional survey. Participants were recruited from an existing Dutch Internet panel of 12,529 persons, and information was collected by means of a structured Internet-based questionnaire. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to assess correlates of self-test use.
resultsResponse to the survey was 63%. Sixteen percent of the respondents said they had ever used at least one self-test, with a mean of 2.1 tests per self-tester. The most frequently reported self-tests were those for diabetes and cholesterol. Self-testers generally reported lower health status and had a higher BMI than non-testers. On the other hand, they were more likely to engage in health-related behaviour such as the use of dietary supplements and homeopathic medicine.
conclusionSelf-testing proved to be relatively prevalent among Dutch Internet users. We therefore think that it is essential to develop appropriate information for consumers, health care providers and policymakers, about the pros and cons of self-testing and specific self-tests. More test-specific research is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.