Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33906976›Full record

ArticleSexually transmitted infections2021

How can we make self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infections and bloodborne viruses more inclusive? A qualitative study with people with mild learning disabilities and low health literacy.

Alan Middleton, Maria Pothoulaki, Melvina Woode Owusu, Paul Flowers, Fiona Mapp, Gabriele Vojt, Rebecca Laidlaw, Claudia S Estcourt

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Distributed Health Literacy Among People With Intellectual Disability, Their Supporters and Healthcare Professionals: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Sexual Health Literacy Among Adults With Intellectual Disabilities: A Scoping Review.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alan MiddletonNursing & Community Health, School of Health 7 ife Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK alan.middleton@gcu.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9933-6318
Maria PothoulakiGlasgow Caledonian University, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow, UK.
Melvina Woode OwusuThe Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Paul FlowersSchool of Psychological Sciences and Health, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Fiona MappThe Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Gabriele VojtGlasgow Caledonian University, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow, UK.
Rebecca LaidlawNursing & Community Health, School of Health 7 ife Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Claudia S EstcourtGlasgow Caledonian University, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5523-5630
Glasgow Caledonian University · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0614-20009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives1.5 million people in the UK have mild to moderate learning disabilities. STIs and bloodborne viruses (BBVs) are over-represented in people experiencing broader health inequalities, which include those with mild learning disabilities. Self-managed care, including self-sampling for STIs/BBVs, is increasingly commonplace, requiring agency and health literacy. To inform the development of a partner notification trial, we explored barriers and facilitators to correct use of an STI/BBV self-sampling pack among people with mild learning disabilities.

methodsUsing purposive and convenience sampling we conducted four interviews and five gender-specific focus groups with 25 people (13 women, 12 men) with mild learning disabilities (July-August 2018) in Scotland. We balanced deductive and inductive thematic analyses of audio transcripts to explore issues associated with barriers and facilitators to correct use of the pack.

resultsAll participants found at least one element of the pack challenging or impossible, but welcomed the opportunity to undertake sexual health screening without attending a clinic and welcomed the inclusion of condoms. Reported barriers to correct use included perceived overly complex STI/BBV information and instructions, feeling overwhelmed and the manual dexterity required for blood sampling. Many women struggled interpreting anatomical diagrams depicting vulvovaginal self-swabbing. Facilitators included pre-existing STI/BBV knowledge, familiarity with self-management, good social support and knowing that the service afforded privacy.

conclusionIn the first study to explore the usability of self-sampling packs for STI/BBV in people with learning disabilities, participants found it challenging to use the pack. Limiting information to the minimum required to inform decision-making, 'easy read' formats, simple language, large font sizes and simpler diagrams could improve acceptability. However, some people will remain unable to engage with self-sampling at all. To avoid widening health inequalities, face-to-face options should continue to be provided for those unable or unwilling to engage with self-managed care.

Indexed as

AdultBlood-Borne InfectionsFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansLearning DisabilitiesMaleMiddle AgedPersons with DisabilitiesQualitative ResearchReagent Kits, DiagnosticScotlandSelf CareSexually Transmitted DiseasesSpecimen HandlingReagent Kits, Diagnosticdelivery of health carehealth services researchpatient participationqualitative researchsexual health

Identifiers

PMID33906976
PMCPMC8165145
OpenAlexW3158148886

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.