SynthesisBMJ open2022
Self-testing for pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a measure of contraceptive self-injection self-efficacy in Uganda.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Feasibility of Multiplex Cytokine Profiling in Preterm Labor: Towards Biomarker Discovery.Biology · 2025Article
- Development of molecularly imprinted polymers for the detection of human chorionic gonadotropin.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploring acceptability, opportunities, and challenges of community-based home pregnancy testing for early antenatal care initiation in rural Kenya.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Four antenatal care visits by four months of pregnancy and four vital tests for pregnant mothers: impact of a community-facility health systems strengthening intervention in Migori County, Kenya.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- From Cereal Grains to Immunochemistry-What Role Have Antibodies Played in the History of the Home Pregnancy Test.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Understanding factors influencing home pregnancy test use among women in western Kenya: A qualitative analysis.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2023Article
- 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesUrine pregnancy tests are often inaccessible in low-income settings. Expanded provision of home pregnancy testing could support self-care options for sexual and reproductive health and rights. We conducted a systematic review of pregnancy self-testing effectiveness, values and preferences and cost.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and EMBASE and four trial registries were searched through 2 November 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included trials and observational studies that compared urine self-testing for pregnancy to health worker-led pregnancy testing on effectiveness outcomes; quantitative and qualitative studies describing values and preferences of end users and health workers and costs of pregnancy self-testing. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models. Findings were summarised in GRADE evidence profiles and synthesised qualitatively.
resultsFor effectiveness, four randomised trials following 5493 individuals after medical abortion showed no difference or improvements in loss to follow-up with home pregnancy self-testing compared with return clinic visits. One additional trial of community health workers offering home pregnancy tests showed a significant increase in pregnancy knowledge and antenatal counselling among 506 clients. Eighteen diverse values and preferences studies found support for pregnancy self-testing because of quick results, convenience, confidentiality/privacy, cost and accuracy. Most individuals receiving pregnancy self-tests for postabortion home management preferred this option. No studies reported cost data.
conclusionPregnancy self-testing is acceptable and valued by end users. Effectiveness data come mostly from articles on postabortion care, and cost data are lacking. Greater availability of pregnancy self-tests, including in postabortion care and CHW programs, may lead to improved health outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021231656.
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.