Trial reportPloS one2019
Feasibility and robustness of an oral HIV self-test in a rural community in South-Africa: An observational diagnostic study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19 self-testing/self-sampling with molecular and professional-use tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- HIV Self-Testing Uptake and Intervention Strategies Among Men in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of practicability and effectiveness between unassisted HIV self-testing and directly assisted HIV self-testing in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a randomized feasibility trial.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Trial
- Preventing Unintended Pregnancies and HIV Through Self-Care Interventions in East and Southern Africa: Findings From a Structured Review.Public health reviews · 2025Review
- Full title- acceptability and feasibility of HIV self-testing (HIVST) among MSM and transgender women (Heliyon · 2024Article
- Observational
- Preferences for oral-fluid-based or blood-based HIV self-testing and provider-delivered testing: an observational study among different populations in Zimbabwe.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Observational
- HIV Self-testing Among Previously Diagnosed HIV-Positive People in Khayelitsha, South Africa: No Evidence of Harm but may Facilitate Re-engagement in ART Care.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
- The study of feasibility and acceptability of using HIV self-tests in high-risk Iranian populations (FSWs, MSM, and TGs): a cross-sectional study.Harm reduction journal · 2022Article
- Article
- Assessment of the Sedia HIV Self-Test Device: Usability and Performance in the Hands of Untrained Users in Johannesburg, South Africa.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Usability and Clinical Performance Characteristics of the Asante HIV1/2 Test by Trained Users in Two African Sites.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Shortening "the Road" to Improve Engagement with HIV Testing Resources: A Qualitative Study Among Stakeholders in Rural Uganda.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2021Article
- Implementation outcomes of HIV self-testing in low- and middle- income countries: A scoping review.PloS one · 2021Article
- Employers' and Employees' Perspectives of HIV Self-Testing at Male-Dominated Work Sites and Linkage to Posttest Services in Uganda.The Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care : JANACArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHIV-self-testing (HIVST) could be a strategy to get more people tested for HIV in resource limited settings. One of the prerequisites of a successful HIVST programme is the availability of an easy to use, valid HIV-test which is robust against field conditions and procedural errors by untrained lay users. METHODS AND
findingsThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate the ability of untrained persons to correctly interpret the OraQuick HIV Self-Test results with oral fluid compared with results obtained by trained users using the matched lot OraQuick Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test and blinded to the results of the Self-Test. Sensitivity of the OraQuick HIV Self-Test in untrained users was 101 in 102 (99.02%; 95%CI = 93.88-99.95%)-and specificity- 1,241 in 1,241 (100.0%; 95%CI = 99.62-100.0%). Forty-eight Self-Tests were excluded in the accuracy analysis (due to a result read as invalid, not sure or ambiguous) resulting in a test system failure rate of 3.45% (95% CI 2.56%-4.55%). At least one observation of difficulty or error with one or more of the test steps were seen in 1,193 (84.6%) participants. Age, education and health literacy were independently associated with the sum score of procedural errors and difficulties. Four tests did not provide a valid result as determined by the trained user's interpretation of the Self-Test.
conclusionsThe OraQuick HIV Self-Test provides reliable and repeatable results in a rural field environment in spite of procedural errors.
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.