Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32487000›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of STD & AIDS2020

Designing an electronic blood-borne virus risk alert to improve uptake of testing.

Paul van Schaik, Susan Lorrimer, David Chadwick

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of STD & AIDS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paul van SchaikSchool of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5322-6554
Susan LorrimerSchool of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
David ChadwickJames Cook University Hospital, Centre for Clinical Infection, Middlesbrough, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7955-9610
Teesside University · GBJames Cook University Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The primary aim of the current study was to test the effect of the presentation design of a test alert system on healthcare workers' (HCWs') decision-making regarding blood-borne virus (BBV) testing. The secondary aim was to determine HCWs' acceptance of the system. An online survey used a within-subjects research design with four design factors as independent variables. The dependent variable was clinical decision. Ten realistic descriptions of hypothetical patients were presented to participants who were asked to decide whether to request BBV testing. The effect of a pre-set course of action to request BBV testing was significant when additional information (cost-effectiveness, date of last BBV test or risk assessment) was not presented, with a 16% increase from 30 to 46% accept decisions. When risk assessment information was presented without a pre-set course of action, the effects of cost-effectiveness (27% increase) and last test date (23% decrease) were significant. The main reason for declining to test was insufficient risk. HCWs' acceptance of the test alert system was high and resistance was low. We make recommendations from the results for the design of a subsequent real-world trial of the test alert system.

Indexed as

Blood-Borne InfectionsDecision MakingElectronicsPatient Acceptance of Health CareAdultBlood-Borne PathogensFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleRisk AssessmentVirus Diseasesalertblood-borne virusDesign factordesign parameternudgeprimary caretechnology acceptance

Identifiers

PMID32487000
PMCPMC7720350
OpenAlexW3000736256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.