Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36121793›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Is there a place for a molecular diagnostic test for pelvic inflammatory disease in primary care? An exploratory qualitative study.

Helen Bittleston, Jane S Hocking, Jane L Goller, Jacqueline Coombe, Deborah Bateson, Sally Sweeney, Kirsteen Fleming, Wilhelmina M Huston

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Helen BittlestonMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5768-3223
Jane S HockingMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Jane L GollerMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Jacqueline CoombeMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Deborah BatesonFamily Planning NSW, Newington, New South Wales, Australia.
Sally SweeneyFamily Planning NSW, Newington, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2586-2403
Kirsteen FlemingFamily Planning NSW, Newington, New South Wales, Australia.
Wilhelmina M HustonFaculty of Science, School of Life Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUFamily Planning NSW · AUThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is currently no test for pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) that is non-invasive and sufficiently sensitive and specific. Clinicians must therefore diagnose PID clinically, ruling out medical emergencies and conducting pelvic examinations where possible. While guidelines state that clinicians should be prepared to over-diagnose PID, it remains an under-diagnosed condition, with severe reproductive health impacts when left untreated. This research is the first to consider the perspectives of end-users on the development of a diagnostic test for PID.

methodsSemi-structured live video feed online (Zoom) interviews were conducted with 11 clinicians and nine women (aged 18-30 years) in Australia to understand how a diagnostic test might be used, and what characteristics a test would need for it to be acceptable to clinicians and young women. Participants were recruited via researcher and university student networks. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes relating to the acceptability and characteristics of a diagnostic test for PID.

resultsSeven general practitioners, four clinicians working in sexual health clinics, and nine young women (aged 21-27 years) were interviewed. Clinicians were aged between 31-58 years and were predominantly female. Clinicians recognised that the development of an accurate test to diagnose PID would be valuable to themselves and other clinicians, particularly those who lack experience diagnosing PID, and those working in certain settings, including emergency departments. They discussed how they might use a test to enhance their clinical assessment but highlighted that it would not replace clinical judgement. Clinicians also considered how a test would impact the patient experience and time to treatment, emphasising that it should be minimally invasive and have a quick turnaround time. Young women said a test would be acceptable if endorsed by a trustworthy clinician.

conclusionsPID remains a challenging diagnosis. Development of a minimally invasive and sufficiently accurate diagnostic test would be acceptable to young women and benefit some clinicians, although no test would completely replace an experienced clinician's judgement in making a PID diagnosis.

Indexed as

Pelvic Inflammatory DiseaseAdultAustraliaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPathology, MolecularPrimary Health CareQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID36121793
PMCPMC9484633
OpenAlexW4296327328

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.