Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30990864›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2019

"It's not a time spent issue, it's a 'what have you spent your time doing?' issue…" A qualitative study of UK patient opinions and expectations for implementation of Point of Care Tests for sexually transmitted infections and antimicrobial resistance.

Sebastian S Fuller, Agata Pacho, Claire E Broad, Achyuta V Nori, Emma M Harding-Esch, Syed Tariq Sadiq

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sebastian S FullerSt George's University of London, Institute for Infection and Immunity, Applied Diagnostic Research and Evaluation Unit, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9284-6630
Agata PachoSt George's University of London, Institute for Infection and Immunity, Applied Diagnostic Research and Evaluation Unit, London, United Kingdom.
Claire E BroadSt George's University of London, Institute for Infection and Immunity, Applied Diagnostic Research and Evaluation Unit, London, United Kingdom.
Achyuta V NoriSt George's University of London, Institute for Infection and Immunity, Applied Diagnostic Research and Evaluation Unit, London, United Kingdom.
Emma M Harding-EschSt George's University of London, Institute for Infection and Immunity, Applied Diagnostic Research and Evaluation Unit, London, United Kingdom.
Syed Tariq SadiqSt George's University of London, Institute for Infection and Immunity, Applied Diagnostic Research and Evaluation Unit, London, United Kingdom.
St George's, University of London · GB

Funding

Department of Health II-LB-0214-20005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) continue to be a major public health concern in the United Kingdom (UK). Epidemiological models have shown that narrowing the time between STI diagnosis and treatment may reduce the population burden of infection, and rapid, accurate point-of-care tests (POCTs) have potential for increasing correct treatment and mitigating the spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We developed the Precise social science programme to incorporate clinician and patient opinions on potential designs and implementation of new POCTs for multiple STIs and AMR detection. We conducted qualitative research, consisting of informal interviews with clinicians and semi-structured in-depth interviews with patients, in six sexual health clinics in the UK. Interviews with clinicians focused on how the new POCTs would likely be implemented into clinical care; these new clinical pathways were then posed to patients in in-depth interviews. Patient interviews showed acceptability of POCTs, however, willingness to wait in clinic for test results depended on the context of patients' sexual healthcare seeking. Patients reporting frequent healthcare visits often based their expectations and opinions of services and POCTs on previous visits. Patients' suggestions for implementation of POCTs included provision of information on service changes and targeting tests to patients concerned they are infected. Our data suggests that patients may accept new POCT pathways if they are given information on these changes prior to attending services and to consider implementing POCTs among patients who are anxious about their infection status and/or who are experiencing symptoms.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialPoint-of-Care TestingSexually Transmitted DiseasesAdolescentAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedUnited KingdomAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID30990864
PMCPMC6467401
OpenAlexW2937689553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.