ArticleBMC public health2018
Acceptability of HIV self-sampling kits (TINY vial) among people of black African ethnicity in the UK: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05690607 (Small Volume Blood Testing Validity and Acceptability for HIV-1 and Hepatitis B), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 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.
Small Volume Blood Testing Validity and Acceptability for HIV-1 and Hepatitis B
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pilot phase of an internet-based RCT of HIVST targeting MSM and transgender people in England and Wales: advertising strategies and acceptability of the intervention.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Trial
- Factors Associated with Mobile App Ordering of HIV Self-test Kits and Reporting of Results Among Black People in Canada: Analysis of Data from "I'm Ready" National HIV Self-testing Implementation Study.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to STI and HIV testing among African and Caribbean heritage communities in high-income countries mapped to the behaviour change wheel: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to HIV testing among African and Caribbean heritage communities: a mixed methods study.Sexually transmitted infections · 2026Article
- Application of the COM-B model to facilitators and barriers to HIV and STI testing among people from Black African and Black Caribbean communities in the UK: a scoping review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Implementation of Home-Based Sexual Health Care Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: Limburg4zero.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- Article
- Women's acceptability of a self-collect HPV same-day screen-and-treat program in a high burden setting in the Pacific.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Prevalence of hepatitis B immunity and infection in home self-sampling HIV service users.Sexually transmitted infections · 2022Article
- Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation.Public health · 2022Article
- Evaluating social and spatial inequalities of large scale rapid lateral flow SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in COVID-19 management: An observational study of Liverpool, UK (November 2020 to January 2021).The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2021Article
- Peer-leaders' experiences and challenges in distributing HIV self-test kits in a rural fishing community, Rakai, Uganda.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Navigating HIV citizenship: identities, risks and biological citizenship in the treatment as prevention era.Health, risk & society · 2019Article
- Correction to: Acceptability of HIV self-sampling kits (TINY vial) among people of black African ethnicity in the UK: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing routine HIV testing among key populations is a public health imperative, so improving access to acceptable testing options for those in need is a priority. Despite increasing targeted distribution and uptake of HIV self-sampling kits (SSKs) among men who have sex with men in the UK, little is known about why targeted SSK interventions for black African users are not as wide-spread or well-used. This paper addresses this key gap, offering insight into why some groups may be less likely than others to adopt certain types of SSK interventions in particular contexts. These data were collected during the development phase of a larger study to explore the feasibility and acceptability of targeted distribution of SSKs to black African people.
methodsWe undertook 6 focus groups with members of the public who self-identified as black African (n = 48), 6 groups with specialists providing HIV and social services to black African people (n = 53), and interviews with HIV specialist consultants and policy-makers (n = 9). Framework analysis was undertaken, using inductive and deductive analysis to develop and check themes.
resultsWe found three valuable components of targeted SSK interventions for this population: the use of settings and technologies that increase choice and autonomy; targeted offers of HIV testing that preserve privacy and do not exacerbate HIV stigma; and ensuring that the specific kit being used (in this case, the TINY vial) is perceived as simple and reliable.
conclusionsThis unique and rigorous research offers insights into participants' views on SSK interventions, offering key considerations when targeting this population.. Given the plethora of HIV testing options, our work demonstrates that those commissioning and delivering SSK interventions will need to clarify (for users and providers) how each kit type and intervention design adds value. Most significantly, these findings demonstrate that without a strong locus of control over their own circumstances and personal information, black African people are less likely to feel that they can pursue an HIV test that is safe and secure. Thus, where profound social inequalities persist, so will inequalities in HIV testing uptake - by any means.
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.