ArticleBMJ open2022
Patient-reported experiences and views on the Cytosponge test: a mixed-methods analysis from the BEST3 trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-reported experiences and patient-reported experience measures in primary care, home care, and community settings. A scoping review.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Predictors of the experience of a Cytosponge test: analysis of patient survey data from the BEST3 trial.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Barriers and Enablers to Capsule Sponge Screening Among People With Heartburn: A Community-Based Qualitative Study in the UK.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Using a mobile unit to deliver capsule sponge testing for Barrett's oesophagus in the community in England through GP invitation and self-referral: an implementation study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Article
- A Practical Guide to Incorporating Novel Barrett's Screening/Surveillance Tools into Clinical Practice.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Discovery and Validation of Molecular Biomarkers for Differentiation of Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus from High-grade Dysplasia and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- Swallowable expandable fibrous capsules for nonendoscopic sampling of esophageal cells.Science advances · 2025Article
- 'This has given me the peace of mind I needed': ethnographic insights into Barrett's oesophagus screening using the capsule sponge test.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- Use of a Non-Endoscopic Capsule-Sponge Triage Test for Reflux Symptoms: Results From the NHS England Prospective Real-World Evaluation.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Oesophageal cell collection device and biomarker testing to identify high-risk Barrett's patients requiring endoscopic investigation.The British journal of surgery · 2024Article
- Patient experiences of Cytosponge: a qualitative study.Frontline gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Dutch, UK and US professionals' perceptions of screening for Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a concept mapping study.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- New Techniques to Screen for Barrett Esophagus.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023Article
- Dutch individuals' views of screening for oesophageal cancer: a focus group study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Measuring patient experience of Cytosponge using the Newcastle ENDOPREM.Frontline gastroenterology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe BEST3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of the Cytosponge-trefoil factor 3, a cell collection device coupled with the biomarker trefoil factor 3, as a tool for detecting Barrett's oesophagus, a precursor of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), in primary care. In this nested study, our aim was to understand patient experiences.
designMixed-methods using questionnaires (including Inventory to Assess Patient Satisfaction, Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-6 and two-item perceived risk) and interviews. OUTCOME MEASURES: Participant satisfaction, anxiety and perceived risk of developing OAC.
settingGeneral practices in England.
participantsPatients with acid reflux enrolled in the intervention arm of the BEST3 trial and attending the Cytosponge appointment (N=1750).
results1488 patients successfully swallowing the Cytosponge completed the follow-up questionnaires, while 30 were interviewed, including some with an unsuccessful swallow.Overall, participants were satisfied with the Cytosponge test. Several items showed positive ratings, in particular convenience and accessibility, staff's interpersonal skills and perceived technical competence. The most discomfort was reported during the Cytosponge removal, with more than 60% of participants experiencing gagging. Nevertheless, about 80% were willing to have the procedure again or to recommend it to friends; this was true even for participants experiencing discomfort, as confirmed in the interviews.Median anxiety scores were below the predefined level of clinically significant anxiety and slightly decreased between baseline and follow-up (p < 0.001). Interviews revealed concerns around the ability to swallow, participating in a clinical trial, and waiting for test results.The perceived risk of OAC increased following the Cytosponge appointment (p<0.001). Moreover, interviews suggested that some participants had trouble conceptualising risk and did not understand the relationships between test results, gastro-oesophageal reflux and risk of Barrett's oesophagus and OAC.
conclusionsWhen delivered during a trial in primary care, the Cytosponge is well accepted and causes little anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN68382401.
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.