ArticleBMC family practice2010
How do people respond to self-test results? A cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC family practice, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repeat HIV testing of individuals with discrepant HIV self-test results in Central Uganda.AIDS research and therapy · 2019Trial
- 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
- 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
- Teasing out Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: An Ethical Critique of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Medicine.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- 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
- Innovative Approach for Enhancing Testing of HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C in the General Population: Protocol for an Acceptability and Feasibility Study (BaroTest 2016).JMIR research protocols · 2018Article
- Home self-testing kits: helpful or harmful?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Article
- Psychological, situational and application-related determinants of the intention to self-test: a factorial survey among students.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Article
- 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
- Translational HIV-1 research: from routine diagnostics to new virology insights in Amsterdam, the Netherlands during 1983-2013.Retrovirology · 2013Review
- 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
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
backgroundSelf-tests, tests on medical conditions that can be performed by consumers without consulting a doctor first, are frequently used. Nevertheless, there are concerns about the safety of self-testing, as it may delay diagnosis and appropriate treatment in the case of inappropriate use of the test, or false-negative results. It is unclear whether self-tests stimulate appropriate follow-up behaviour. Our aim was to examine the frequency of self-test use, consumers' response to self-test results in terms of their confidence in the result, reassurance by the test result, and follow-up behaviour.
methodsA two step cross-sectional survey was designed. A random sample of 6700 Internet users in an existing Internet panel received an online questionnaire on the use of self-tests. Self-tests were defined as tests on body materials, initiated by consumers with the aim to diagnose a disease or risk factor. A second questionnaire on consumers' response to self-test results was sent to the respondents that were identified as a self-tester in the first questionnaire (n = 703).
results18.1% (799/4416) of the respondents had ever performed a self-test, the most frequently used tests being those for diabetes (5.3%), kidney disease (4.9%), cholesterol (4.5%), urinary tract infection (1.9%) and HIV/AIDS and Chlamydia (both 1.6%). A total of 78.1% of the testers with a normal test result and 81.4% of those with an abnormal result reported confidence in this result. Almost all (95.6%) of the testers with a normal result felt reassured. After a normal result, 78.1% did not take any further action and 5.8% consulted a doctor. The corresponding figures after an abnormal test result were 9.3% and 72.2%, respectively.
conclusionsRespondents who had performed a self-test seemed to base their follow-up behaviour on the result of the test. They had confidence in the test result, and were often reassured by a normal result. After an abnormal result, most self-testers sought medical care. Because consumers seem to trust the self-test results, further research should focus on the development of consumer information addressing indications for performing a self-test, the validity of self-tests and appropriate interpretation of and management after a test.
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.