ArticleJMIR formative research2023
Lessons Learned From the Implementation of a Pilot Study on Self-collected Specimen Return by Sexual Minority Men (Project Caboodle!): Qualitative Exploration.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility and Acceptability of a mHealth Patient Navigation Intervention to Increase Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Uptake in Racially and Ethnically Diverse Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in Los Angeles (PrEPresent): Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- A Narrative Review of Remote Biospecimen Collection Product and Implementation Considerations for Sexual Health Clinical Research.AIDS and behavior · 2026Review
- Quality, acceptability and usability of self-sampling kits used by non-healthcare professionals for STI diagnosis in Spain: a single-blind study.Sexually transmitted infections · 2024Article
- Sexual behavior stigma and HIV/STI biospecimen self-collection among cisgender gay, bisexual, and other sexually minoritized men in the United States.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSelf-collection of specimens at home and their return by mail might help reduce some of the barriers to HIV and bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening encountered by gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). To evaluate the benefits and challenges of bringing this approach to scale, researchers are increasingly requesting GBMSM to return self-collected specimens as part of web-based sexual health studies. Testing self-collected hair samples for preexposure prophylaxis drug levels may also be a viable option to identify GBMSM who face adherence difficulties and offer them support.
objectiveProject Caboodle! sought to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of self-collecting at home and returning by mail 5 specimens (a finger-stick blood sample, a pharyngeal swab, a rectal swab, a urine specimen, and a hair sample) among 100 sexually active GBMSM in the United States aged between 18 and 34 years. In this manuscript, we aimed to describe the key lessons learned from our study's implementation and to present recommendations offered by participants to maximize the rates of self-collected specimen return.
methodsFollowing the specimen self-collection phase, a subset of 25 participants (11 who returned all 5 specimens, 4 who returned between 1 and 4 specimens, and 10 who did not return any specimens) was selected for in-depth interviews conducted via a videoconferencing platform. During the session, a semistructured interview guide was used to discuss the factors influencing decisions regarding returning self-collected specimens for laboratory processing. The transcripts were analyzed using template analysis.
resultsUniversity branding of web-based and physical materials instilled a sense of trust in participants and increased their confidence in the test results. Shipping the specimen self-collection box in plain unmarked packaging promoted discretion during transit and on its receipt. Using different colored bags with matching color-coded instructions to self-collect each type of specimen minimized the potential for confusion. Participants recommended including prerecorded instructional videos to supplement the written instructions, providing information on the importance of triple-site bacterial STI testing, and adding a reminder of the types of testing that would and would not be conducted on hair samples. Participants also suggested tailoring the specimen self-collection box to include only the tests that they might be interested in completing at that time, adding real-time videoconferencing to the beginning of the study to introduce the research team, and sending personalized reminders following the delivery of the specimen self-collection box.
conclusionsOur results offer valuable insights into aspects that facilitated participant engagement in self-collected specimen return, as well as areas for potential improvement to maximize return rates. Our findings can help guide the design of future large-scale studies and public health programs for home-based HIV, bacterial STI, and preexposure prophylaxis adherence testing. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/13647.
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.