ArticlePloS one2017
Socio-demographic, health-related, and individual correlates of diagnostic self-testing by lay people: Results from a representative survey in Germany.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Performance evaluation and acceptability of point-of-careInternational journal of STD & AIDS · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA broad range of self-tests (testing for e.g. HIV, cancer, hepatitis B/C) have become available and can be conducted by lay consumers without the help of a health professional. The aims of this study were to (a) investigate the prevalence of self-testing, (b) identify the most frequently used self-tests, and (c) explore the associations between socio-demographic, health-related and individual factors with self-testing.
methodsA face-to-face plus paper-pencil cross-sectional survey was conducted. The sample consisted of 2.527 respondents who were representative of the German population in terms of the age, sex, and residence. Basic descriptive statistics and univariate logistic regression analyses were performed.
results8.5% of the participants reported having used one or more self-tests in the past, totalling 363 self-tests, with a mean of 1.7 (min. = 1, max. = 6). The three self-tests most frequently indicated were for detecting diabetes, bowel cancer, and allergies. Self-testers were older (Nagelkerke R2 = .006, p < .01), had a higher BMI (Nagelkerke R2 = .013, p < .001) and displayed more physical and mental fatigue (Nagelkerke R2 = .031, p < .001) than non-testers. Self-testers also reported higher global life satisfaction values (Nagelkerke R2 = .008, p < .01) and a higher educational level (Nagelkerke R2 = .015, p < .01).
conclusionsSelf-testing is fairly prevalent in Germany Given the current shortage of physicians in Germany, especially in rural areas, and recent studies on the use of self-medication, the topic of self-testing has a great practical and socio-political relevance. Future studies should investigate further predictors of self-testing (e.g. contextual, situational and individual factors) as well as the emotional consequences of testing as a layperson without the attendance of a health professional.
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.