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.
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.
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, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Review
- 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 · 2026Article
- Disabled people faced greater challenges accessing sexual and reproductive health services in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain: evidence from the Natsal-COVID survey.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Sexual Health Literacy Among Adults With Intellectual Disabilities: A Scoping Review.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Implementation of Home-Based Sexual Health Care Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: Limburg4zero.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- Who accessed STI testing in Britain during the COVID-19 pandemic and how: Findings from Natsal-COVID, a cross-sectional quasi-representative survey.International journal of STD & AIDS · 2024Article
- How does online postal self-sampling (OPSS) shape access to testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs)? A qualitative study of service users.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Service user experiences of using internet-based testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs): a qualitative study.Sexually transmitted infections · 2024Article
- Article
- Understanding the barriers and facilitators to using self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infections and blood-borne viruses: Thematic analyses for intervention optimization.British journal of health psychology · 2023Article
- Access to and quality of sexual and reproductive health services in Britain during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study of patient experiences.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2023Article
- Using the behaviour change wheel approach to optimize self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infection and blood borne viruses.British journal of health psychology · 2022Article
- 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.