ArticleBMC infectious diseases2022
Sensitivity and specificity of OraQuick® HIV self-test compared to a 4th generation laboratory reference standard algorithm in urban and rural Zambia.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Translational opportunities in aptamer and nanobody lateral flow assays within the WHO REASSURED framework.Sensors & diagnostics · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a nomogram model for predicting negative/indeterminate HIV-1 antibody confirmation: a strategy to streamline the diagnostic pathway.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Oral fluid versus blood in HIV self-testing: A step towards "95-95-95" targets of the UNAIDS?Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2025Review
- Analytical and Clinical Validation of the ConfiSign HIV Self-Test for Blood-Based HIV Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Exploring the diagnostic accuracy of an HIV self-test optimized by a digital app-based solution: Results from a secondary data analysis of a field trial in South Africa.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Pilot Findings From the First Legalized Mobile Retail Pharmacy Clinic in the United States for Infectious Disease Treatment and Prevention Tailored to Reach People Who Use Drugs.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- HIV Self-Testing: A Discussion on the Benefits, Limitations, and Implications for Public Health with a Focus on Poland.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Cost and Cost-Effectiveness of Distributing HIV Self-Tests within Assisted Partner Services in Western Kenya.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of community-led HIV self-testing among key populations in Côte d'Ivoire, Mali, and Senegal.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2024Article
- Accuracy of and preferences for blood-based versus oral-fluid-based HIV self-testing in Malawi: a cross-sectional study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Lessons learned from implementation of four HIV self-testing (HIVST) distribution models in Zambia: applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to understand impact of contextual factors on implementation.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Impact of HIV self-testing for oral pre-exposure prophylaxis scale-up on drug resistance and HIV outcomes in western Kenya: a modelling study.The lancet. HIV · 2024Article
- Promoting STI self-testing through HIV self-testing.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Article
- Acceptability, feasibility, and accuracy of blood-based HIV self-testing: A cross-sectional study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- HIV Self-Testing for Efficient PrEP Delivery Is Highly Acceptable and Feasible in Public Health HIV Clinics in Kenya: A Mixed Methods Study.Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS CareArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHIV self-testing (HIVST) has the potential to increase coverage of HIV testing, but concerns exist about intended users' ability to correctly perform and interpret tests, especially in poor communities with low literacy rates. We assessed the clinical performance of the 2016 prototype OraQuick® HIV Self-Test in rural and urban communities in Zambia to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the test compared to the national HIV rapid diagnostic test (RDT) algorithm and a laboratory reference standard using 4th generation enzyme immunoassays and HIV RNA detection.
methodsParticipants were recruited from randomly selected rural and urban households and one urban health facility between May 2016 and June 2017. Participants received a brief demonstration of the self-test, and then self-tested without further assistance. The research team re-read the self-test, repeated the self-test, drew blood for the laboratory reference, and conducted RDTs following the national HIV testing algorithm (Determine™ HIV1/2 (Alere) confirmed using Unigold™ HIV1/2 (Trinity Biotech)). Selected participants (N = 85) were videotaped whilst conducting the testing to observe common errors.
resultsInitial piloting showed that written instructions alone were inadequate, and a demonstration of self-test use was required. Of 2,566 self-test users, 2,557 (99.6%) were able to interpret their result. Of participants who were videoed 75/84 (89.3%) completed all steps of the procedure correctly. Agreement between the user-read result and the researcher-read result was 99.1%. Compared to the RDT algorithm, user-conducted HIVST was 94.1% sensitive (95%CI: 90.2-96.7) and 99.7% specific (95%CI: 99.3-99.9). Compared to the laboratory reference, both user-conducted HIVST (sensitivity 87.5%, 95%CI: 82.70-91.3; specificity 99.7%, 95%CI: 99.4-99.9) and the national RDT algorithm (sensitivity 93.4%, 95%CI: 89.7-96.1%; specificity 100% (95%CI: 99.8-100%) had considerably lower sensitivity.
conclusionsSelf-testers in Zambia who used OraQuick® HIV Self-Test achieved reasonable clinical performance compared to the national RDT algorithm. However, sensitivity of the self-test was reduced compared to a laboratory reference standard, as was the national RDT algorithm. In-person demonstration, along with the written manufacturer instructions, was needed to obtain accurate results. Programmes introducing self-care diagnostics should pilot and optimise support materials to ensure they are appropriately adapted to context.
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.