Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37738083›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2023

Web-Based STI/HIV Testing Services Available for Access in Australia: Systematic Search and Analysis.

Ethan Trey Cardwell, Teralynn Ludwick, Christopher Fairley, Christopher Bourne, Shanton Chang, Jane S Hocking, Fabian Y S Kong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors.

Ethan Trey CardwellMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0009-0000-8446-7940
Teralynn LudwickMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4160-7354
Christopher FairleyMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9081-1664
Christopher BourneCentre for Population Health, New South Wales Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7391-3941
Shanton ChangSchool of Computing and Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2163-3910
Jane S HockingMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9329-8501
Fabian Y S KongMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9349-3080

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSexually transmitted infection (STI) rates continue to rise in Australia, and timely access to testing and treatment is crucial to reduce transmission. Web-based services have been viewed as a way to improve timely access to STI/HIV testing and have proliferated in recent years. However, the regulation of these services in Australia is minimal, leading to concerns about their quality. The purpose of this review was to systematically identify web-based STI/HIV testing services available in Australia and assess them on aspects of quality, reliability, and accessibility.

objectiveWe aim to systematically identify and assess web-based STI/HIV testing services available in Australia.

methodsA Google search of Australian web-based services was conducted in March 2022 and repeated in September 2022 using Boolean operators and search terms related to test services (eg, on the internet or home), STIs (eg, chlamydia or gonorrhea), and test type (eg, self-test). The first 10 pages were assessed, and services were categorized as self-testing (ST; test at home), self-sampling (SS; sample at home and return to laboratory), or self-navigated pathology (SNP; specimens collected at pathology center). Website reliability was assessed against the Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct, and service quality was assessed using a scorecard that was developed based on similar reviews, Australian guidelines for in-person services, and UK standards. Additionally, we looked at measures of accessibility including cost, rural access, and time to test results.

resultsSeventeen services were identified (8 ST, 2 SS, and 7 SNP). Only 4 services offered recommended testing for all 4 infections (chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, and HIV) including genital, anorectal, and oropharyngeal sites, and 5 offered tests other than those recommended by Australian testing guidelines (eg, Ureaplasma). Nine services (1 SNP, 8 self-test) had no minimum age requirements for access. Reliability scores (scale 0-8) were similar between all services (range 4.75-8.0). Quality weighted scores (scale 0-58) were similar between SNP and SS services (average 44.89, SD 5.56 and 44.75, SD 1.77, respectively) but lower for ST services (22.66, SD 8.93; P=.002). Government-funded services were of higher quality than private services (43.54, SD 6.71 vs 29.43, SD 13.55; P=.03). The cost for services varied between SNP (Aus $0-$595; ie, US $0-$381.96), self-sample (Aus $0; ie, US $0), and ST (Aus $0-$135; ie, US $0-$86.66). The time to test results was much shorter for SNP services (~4 days) than for SS (~12 days) and ST (~14 days).

conclusionsThis review identified considerable variability in the quality and reliability of the web-based STI/HIV testing services in Australia. Given the proliferation and use of these services will likely increase, it is imperative that Australia develops national standards to ensure the standard-of-care offered by web-based STI/HIV testing services is appropriate to protect Australian users from the impact of poorly performing and inappropriate tests.

Indexed as

GonorrheaSexually Transmitted DiseasesAustraliaHIV TestingHumansInternetReproducibility of Resultsself-testingsexual healthSTI/HIVSTI/HIV testingweb-based STI/HIV testingweb-based STI testing

Identifiers

PMID37738083
PMCPMC10559186

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.