ArticlePloS one2024
Sampling of healthcare professionals' perspective on point-of-care technologies from 2019-2021: A survey of benefits, concerns, and development.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patients' preferences and perceptions of point-of-care technologies: Survey results from the lung disease community.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Point-of-care testing reduces antibiotic prescribing for adults with community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- AI-based detection of neutrophil dysplasia: an accessible and sensitive model for MDS diagnosis from peripheral blood.Annals of hematology · 2025Article
- Evolving perceptions of point-of-care-technologies: Results from a nationwide survey of healthcare professionals.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Revolutionary Point-of-Care Wearable Diagnostics for Early Disease Detection and Biomarker Discovery through Intelligent Technologies.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Acceptability and Determinants for Implementation of the EnzySystem, a Novel Near-Patient Testing Platform for Haemophilia A.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of HemophiliaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Point-of-care technology (POCT) plays a vital role in modern healthcare by providing a fast diagnosis, improving patient management, and extending healthcare access to remote and resource-limited areas. The objective of this study was to understand how healthcare professionals in the United States perceived POCTs during 2019-2021 to assess the decision-making process of implementing these newer technologies into everyday practice. A 5-point Likert scale survey was sent to respondents to evaluate their perceptions of benefits, concerns, characteristics, and development of point-of-care technologies. The 2021 survey was distributed November 1st, 2021- February 15th, 2022, with a total of 168 independent survey responses received. Of the respondents, 59% identified as male, 73% were white, and 48% have been in practice for over 20 years. The results showed that most agreed that POCTs improve patient management (94%) and improve clinician confidence in decision making (92%). Healthcare professionals were most concerned with potentially not being reimbursed for the cost of the POCT (37%). When asked to rank the top 3 important characteristics of POCT, respondents chose accuracy, ease of use, and availability. It is important to note this survey was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. To achieve an even greater representation of healthcare professionals' point of view on POCTs, further work to obtain responses from a larger, more diverse population of providers is needed.
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.