ArticleSexually transmitted infections2019
Differences in experiences of barriers to STI testing between clients of the internet-based diagnostic testing service GetCheckedOnline.com and an STI clinic in Vancouver, Canada.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Direct Access for Patients to Diagnostic Testing and Results Using eHealth: Systematic Review on eHealth and Diagnostics.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Perceptions and Experiences of Internet-Based Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections: Systematic Review and Synthesis of Qualitative Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Perceived benefits, barriers, and health system consequences of introducing new models of online sexually transmitted and blood-borne infection testing in Ontario, Canada.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Complex role of digital health literacy in awareness and use of digital sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections testing: a structural equation modelling analysis of the 2022 GetCheckedOnline survey.Sexually transmitted infections · 2026Article
- Health Equity Analysis of Awareness and Use of GetCheckedOnline, British Columbia's Digital Intervention for Sexually Transmitted and Blood-Borne Infection Testing in 5 Urban, Suburban, and Rural Communities: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Comprehensive at-home sexually transmitted and blood borne infection (STBBI) testing program: A pilot study.International journal of STD & AIDS · 2026Article
- Acceptability and usability of home-based HIV and blood glucose self-testing and home-based blood pressure measurement in Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Self-sampling and self-testing for HIV at a commercial and community-based test provider in the Netherlands: user preferences and usability.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- To whom should we prescribe doxy-PEP? A retrospective review of public health surveillance data for bacterial STI diagnoses among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Ottawa, Canada.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Shifting Grounds-Facilitating Self-Care in Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections Through the Use of Self-Test Technology: Qualitative Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2024Article
- Reach of GetCheckedOnline among gay, bisexual, transgender and queer men and Two-Spirit people and correlates of use 5 years after program launch in British Columbia, Canada.Sexually transmitted infections · 2024Article
- A decade of clinical microbiology: top 10 advances in 10 years: what every infection preventionist and antimicrobial steward should know.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2024Review
- The roles of the general practitioner and sexual health centre in HIV testing: comparative insights and impact on HIV incidence rates in the Rotterdam area, the Netherlands - a cross-sectional population-based study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Differential uptake and effects of digital sexually transmitted and bloodborne infection testing interventions among equity-seeking groups: a scoping review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2023Article
- A Web-Based, Mail-Order Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Program: Qualitative Analysis of User Feedback.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Access to, usage and clinic outcomes of, online postal sexually transmitted infection services: a scoping review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesInternet-based STI testing programmes may overcome barriers posed by in-clinic testing, though uptake could reflect social gradients. The role these services play in comparison to clinical testing services is unknown. We compared experiences of testing barriers between STI clinic clients to clients of GetCheckedOnline.com (GCO; where clients take a printed lab form to a lab).
methodsOur 10-month cross-sectional study was conducted after GCO was promoted to STI clinic clients and men who have sex with men (MSM). Clinic and GCO clients completed an online survey assessing testing barriers and facilitators; responses were compared using bivariate analysis (level of significance P<0.01; significant results below).
resultsCompared with 321 clinic clients, the 73 GCO clients were more likely to be older (median 35 vs 30 years), MSM (45% vs 16%), be testing routinely (67% vs 39%), have delayed testing for any reason (76% vs 54%) and due to clinic distance (28% vs 9%), report delays due to wait times (50% vs 17%), embarrassment with testing (16% vs 6%), discomfort discussing sexual health where they usually go for testing (39% vs 22%), as well as discomfort discussing sexual history with (19% vs 5%) and fearing judgement from (30% vs 15%) any healthcare provider. GCO clients were less likely to have found clinic hours convenient (59% vs 77%) and clinic appointments easy to make (49% vs 66%), and more likely to report long wait times (50% vs 17%). We found no differences in technology skills/use.
conclusionsIn this urban setting, an internet-based testing service effectively engaged individuals experiencing testing barriers, with few social gradients in uptake. While some testing barriers could be addressed through increasing access to clinical services, others require social and structural changes, highlighting the importance of internet-based STI testing services to increasing test uptake.
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.