Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34275450›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

An observed, prospective field study to evaluate the performance and acceptance of a blood-based HIV self-test in Canada.

Richard A Galli, Jason M Lo Hog Tian, Michelle Sumner-Williams, Kristin McBain, Emal Stanizai, Wangari Tharao, Muna Aden, Heather Jamieson, Mark Da Silva, Anne-Fanny Vassal and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Reach and effectiveness outcomes of the "I'm Ready" HIV self-testing program in Black communities in Canada.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

19 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Richard A GalliMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jason M Lo Hog TianMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michelle Sumner-WilliamsMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Kristin McBainMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Emal StanizaiMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Wangari TharaoWomen's Health in Women's Hands, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Muna AdenWomen's Health in Women's Hands, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Heather JamiesonHassle Free Clinic, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Mark Da SilvaHassle Free Clinic, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Anne-Fanny VassalClinique Medicale L'Actuel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Lorie GuilbaultClinique Medicale L'Actuel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Laurie IrelandNine Circles Community Health Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Kim WitgesNine Circles Community Health Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Alexandra KingUniversity of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Kehinde AmetepeeUniversity of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Nathan J LachowskyCommunity Based Research Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Nitika Pant PaiMcGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Tony MazzulliPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sean B RourkeMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. sean.rourke@utoronto.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-6162-7358
Unity Health TorontoHassle Free Clinic · CANine Circles Community Health Centre · CAUniversity of Saskatchewan · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAWomen's Health In Women's Hands · CAMcGill University · CAPublic Health Ontario · CAUniversity of Victoria · CA

Funding

CIHR FRN 164067
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelf testing for HIV is a targeted intervention with the potential to increase the access, uptake and frequency of HIV testing and more effectively reach the undiagnosed, especially in priority populations. The objectives of this study were to (1) evaluate the INSTI HIV self-test performance compared with laboratory reference testing, (2) document if intended users can perform the steps to use the HIV self-test device, and (3) document if intended users can successfully interpret contrived positive, negative, and invalid results. Study was intended to be submitted to Health Canada for review for regulatory approval purposes.

methodsThe study used a cross-sectional design and recruited consenting adults who were representative of intended users of HIV self-testing from four community sites across Ontario, Québec, and Manitoba between August 2019 and March 2020. The results of the observed HIV self-test were compared with results of the Abbott Architect HIV Ag/Ab Combo test. Usability outcomes for critical (e.g., lancing finger, blood droplet into bottle, shaking bottle four times) and noncritical self-test procedure steps were also determined.

resultsOverall, 77% (n = 522) of participants were between 18 and 45 years of age, 61% (n = 410) were male, 71% (n = 480) had some college or more education, and 45% (n = 307) were employed; identity for race and ethnicity: Caucasian (44%; n = 296), African, Caribbean or Black (17%; n = 113), Indigenous [First Nations, Métis or Inuit] (14%; n = 95), Asian (16%; n = 106), Latin American (7%; n = 46). Primary performance analysis on 678 completed HIV self-tests revealed a positive percent agreement of 100% (5/5, 95% CI: 43.6-97.0%) and a negative percent agreement of 99.5% (614/617, 95% CI: 98.6-99.8%) with the comparator method. The overall percent agreement of results interpretation between participant and observer was 93.5% (n = 633). For the 708 participants who took part in the usability study, the average success rate for steps determined to be "critical" for successful completion of the test was 92.4%. 97% (n = 670) of participants found the instructions easy to follow, and 95% (n = 655) of participants indicated that they would use the test again. Of the 404 participants who interpreted the strong positive, weak positive, negative, and invalid contrived results, successful interpretation ranged from 90.6% (for weak positive, n = 366) to 99.3% (for negative, n = 401).

conclusionsThe addition of a regulatory-approved self-test into the Canadian HIV testing landscape could significantly increase HIV testing rates. Having a blood-based HIV self-test approved in Canada can offer an accurate, acceptable, and simple alternative to facility-based HIV testing, particularly when impacted by Coronavirus pandemic restrictions.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSelf-TestingAdultCaribbean RegionCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMaleManitobaMiddle AgedOntarioProspective StudiesQuebecAcceptanceAccuracyBlood-based self-testHIVUsability

Identifiers

PMID34275450
PMCPMC8286440
OpenAlexW3183544621

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.