Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37563249›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2023

A randomised study of nurse collected venous blood and self-collected dried blood spots for the assessment of cardiovascular risk factors in the Understanding Society Innovation Panel.

Meena Kumari, Alexandria Andrayas, Tarek Al Baghal, Jonathan Burton, Thomas F Crossley, Kerry S Jones, Damon A Parkington, Albert Koulman, Michaela Benzeval

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Dried Blood Spots to Assess Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Health.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Meena KumariInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK. Mkumari@essex.ac.uk.
Alexandria AndrayasInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Tarek Al BaghalInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Jonathan BurtonInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Thomas F CrossleyEuropean University Institute, Fiesole, Italy.
Kerry S JonesNutritional Biomarker Laboratory, MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Damon A ParkingtonNutritional Biomarker Laboratory, MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Albert KoulmanNutritional Biomarker Laboratory, MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Michaela BenzevalInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
University of Essex · GBMRC Epidemiology Unit · GBEuropean University Institute · ITInstitute for Social and Economic Research · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dried blood spot (DBS) sample collection has been suggested as a less invasive, cheaper and more convenient alternative to venepuncture, which requires trained personnel, making it a potentially viable approach for self-collection of blood on a large scale. We examine whether participants in a longitudinal survey were willing to provide a DBS sample in different interview settings, and how resulting cardiovascular risk biomarkers compared with those from venous blood to calculate clinical risk. Participants of the Understanding Society Innovation Panel, a representative sample of UK households, were randomly assigned to three modes of interview. Most participants (84%) were interviewed in their allocated mode. Participants (n = 2162) were interviewed by a nurse who collected both a blood sample by venepuncture and a DBS card ('nurse collection') or participants were seen by an interviewer or took part in the survey online to self-collect a DBS card ('self-collection'). All DBS cards were returned in the post after the sample had dried. Lipids (total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, triglycerides), HbA1c and C-reactive protein were measured in venous and DBS samples and equivalence was calculated. The resultant values were used to confirm equivalent prevalence of risk of cardiovascular disease in each type of blood sample by mode of participation. Of participants interviewed by a nurse 69% consented to venous blood sample and 74% to a DBS sample, while in the self-collection modes, 35% consented to DBS collection. Demographic characteristics of participants in self-collection mode was not different to those in nurse collection mode. The percentage of participants with clinically raised biomarkers did not significantly differ between type of blood collection (for example, 62% had high cholesterol (> 5 mmol/l) measured by venepuncture and 67% had high cholesterol within the self-collected DBS sample (p = 0.13)). While self-collected DBS sampling had a lower response rate to DBS collected by a nurse, participation did not vary by key demographic characteristics. This study demonstrates that DBS collection is a feasible method of sample collection that can provide acceptable measures of clinically relevant biomarkers, enabling the calculation of population levels of cardiovascular disease risk.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesBiomarkersCholesterol, HDLDried Blood Spot TestingHeart Disease Risk FactorsHumansRisk FactorsBiomarkersCholesterol, HDL

Identifiers

PMID37563249
PMCPMC10415328
OpenAlexW4385724410

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.