ArticlePloS one2020
Field evaluation of capillary blood and oral-fluid HIV self-tests in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Practice and Potential Role of HIV Self-testing in China: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Pooled it
- Preferences, beliefs, and attitudes about oral fluid and blood-based HIV self-testing among truck drivers in Kenya choosing not to test for HIV.Frontiers in public health · 2022Trial
- Epidemic Mitigation and Marginal Mortality Gains Using Self-Testing as a Diagnostic Intervention for Epidemic-Prone Diseases in Africa.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Oral fluid versus blood in HIV self-testing: A step towards "95-95-95" targets of the UNAIDS?Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2025Review
- Syndemic Synergy of HPV, HIV, and HSV-2 for Oncogenic HPV Replication in Female Sex Workers.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Antiviral Effect ofCurrent pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2025Review
- Comparative acceptability of saliva-based self-testing versus blood-based self-testing for HIV screening among key populations in Kisangani.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Accuracy of and preferences for blood-based versus oral-fluid-based HIV self-testing in Malawi: a cross-sectional study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Measuring the performance of computer vision artificial intelligence to interpret images of HIV self-testing results.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Caregiver-assisted testing with HIV self-test kits for children 18 months and older: A GRADE systematic review.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Observational
- Preferences for oral-World journal of methodology · 2023Article
- Acceptability, feasibility, and accuracy of blood-based HIV self-testing: A cross-sectional study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Usability and Clinical Performance Characteristics of the Asante HIV1/2 Test by Trained Users in Two African Sites.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Implementation of HIV Self-Testing to Reach Men in Rural uMkhanyakude, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. a DO-ART Trial Sub Study.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Uptake of HIV/AIDS Services Following a Positive Self-Test Is Lower in Men Than Women in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Analytical Performance of the Exacto Test HIV Self-Test: A Cross-Sectional Field Study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.Open forum infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Willingness to use and distribute HIV self-test kits to clients and partners: A qualitative analysis of female sex workers' collective opinion and attitude in Côte d'Ivoire, Mali, and Senegal.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHIV self-testing (HIVST) is an additional approach to increasing uptake of HIV testing services. The practicability and accuracy of and the preference for the capillary blood self-test (Exacto Test HIV) versus the oral fluid self-test (OraQuick HIV self-test) were compared among untrained individuals in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
methodsThis multicenter cross-sectional study (2019) used face-to-face, tablet-based, structured questionnaires in a facility-based HIVST approach. Volunteers from the general public who were at high risk of HIV infection, who were between 18 and 49 years of age, and who had signed an informed consent form were eligible for the study. The successful performance and correct interpretation of the self-test results were the main outcomes of the practicability evaluation. The successful performance of the HIV self-test was conditioned by the presence of the control band. The sensitivity and specificity of the participant-interpreted results compared to the laboratory results were estimated for accuracy. Preference for either type of self-test was assessed. Logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with participants' preference.
resultsA total of 528 participants were included in this survey. The rate of successful performance of the HIV self-tests was high, with the blood test (99.6%) and the oral-fluid test (99.4%) yielding an absolute difference of 0.2% (95% CI: -1.8 to 1.1; P = 0.568). The rate of correct interpretation of the HIV self-test results was 84.4% with the blood test versus 83.8% with the oral-fluid test (difference = 0.6; 95% CI: -0.2 to 1.7; P = 0.425). Misinterpretation (25.4% for the blood test and 25.6% for the oral-fluid test) and inability to interpret (20.4% for the blood test and 21.1% for the oral-fluid test) test results were significantly more prevalent with invalid tests. The Exacto Test HIV self-test and the OraQuick HIV self-test showed 100% and 99.2% sensitivity, and 98.9% and 98.1% specificity, respectively. Preference for oral-fluid-based HIVST was greater than that for blood-based HIVST (85.6% versus 78.6%; P = 0.008). Preference for the blood test was greater among participants with a university education (86.1%; aOR = 2.4 [95% CI: 1.1 to 4.9]; P = 0.016), a higher risk of HIV infection (88.1%; aOR = 2.3 [95% CI: 1.0 to 5.3]; P = 0.047), and knowledge about the existence of HIVST (89.3%; aOR = 2.2 [95% CI: 1.0 to 5.0]; P = 0.05).
conclusionOur field observations demonstrate that blood-based and oral-fluid-based HIVST are both practicable approaches with a high and comparable rate of accuracy in the study setting. Although preference for the oral-fluid test was generally greater, preference for the blood test was greater among participants with a university education, a high risk of HIV infection, and knowledge about the existence of HIVST. Both approaches seem complementary in the sense that users can choose the type of self-test that best suits them for a similar result. Taken together, our observations support the use of the two HIV self-test kits in the DRC.
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.