ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
A Lay-User Assessment of Hepatitis C Virus Self-Testing Device Usability and Interpretation in Johannesburg, South Africa.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acceptability and Usability of Blood-Based and Oral Fluid HCV Self-Testing Among Men-Who-Have-Sex-with-Men and Transgender Women on PrEP.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Lessons learned from viral hepatitis testing that inform law and policy responses to steatotic liver disease.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Review
- Assessing user experience with the Bioline™ HCV point-of-care test in primary healthcare settings: a mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Assessing hepatitis C self-testing within differentiated care models in Cameroon: Feasibility, acceptability, and linkage to care for key and priority populations.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Usability and acceptability of self-testing for hepatitis C virus exposure in a high-prevalence urban informal settlement in Karachi, Pakistan.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Usability and acceptability of oral fluid- and blood-based hepatitis C virus self-testing among the general population and men who have sex with men in Malaysia.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Quality Assurance for Hepatitis C Virus Point-of-Care Diagnostics in Sub-Saharan Africa.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Usability and acceptability of oral fluid hepatitis C self-testing among people who inject drugs in Coastal Kenya: a cross-sectional pilot study.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of secondary distribution of hepatitis C self-testing within the context of a house-to-house hepatitis C micro-elimination programme in Karachi, Pakistan.BMC public health · 2022Article
- HCV Self-Testing to Expand Testing: A Pilot Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Observational
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Only 20% of people with hepatitis C virus (HCV) know their status. In low-income countries diagnosis is under 10%. Self-testing for HCV antibodies (HCVST) could expand the coverage of HCV testing services. Currently, there are no stringent regulatory authority (SRA) approved HCVSTs, therefore lay-user usability of three prototype kits was assessed. This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted with 171 (CareStart n = 60, Bioline n = 52, First Response n = 59) participants. Participants were given one of the three HCVST kits with only instructions for use (IFU) and asked to perform the test in front of a professional trained in rapid diagnostic tests (RDT). Usability indices were calculated based on the correctness of performing each step of the product-specific process followed by contrived results interpretation and a post-test interview. The usability index was 93.9% for CareStart, 90.7% for Bioline and 94.9% for First Response. Most errors were on incorrect handwashing, sample collection and transfer to the test device. An average of 93.1% of contrived results were correctly interpreted, with most errors related to interpreting invalid results. Most participants (n = 167) stated they would visit a clinic after a positive result. With negative results, nearly half (28/60 (46.7%)) stated they should condomize, while just over two-thirds of participants that used Bioline (35/52 (67.3%)) and First Response (38/59 (64.4%)) said they should re-test. Most participants (n = 162) found the devices easy to use. Participants liked that self-testing was fast, private and convenient, however there were some confusion with IFU steps and pictures, finger-pricking with the lancet, collecting blood after the finger-prick, and transferring the sample/buffer. Prototype HCVST kits exhibit high usability and result interpretation by lay-users, and should be considered for SRA approval.
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.