ArticleCardiovascular digital health journal2024
Point-of-care testing preferences 2020-2022: Trends over the years.
Article in Cardiovascular digital health journal, 2024. 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.
- Article
- Patients' preferences and perceptions of point-of-care technologies: Survey results from the lung disease community.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Stakeholder perspectives on a hypothetical rapid test for antibiotic resistant bacteria: an exploratory study.Frontiers in antibiotics · 2025Article
- Evolving perceptions of point-of-care-technologies: Results from a nationwide survey of healthcare professionals.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The use of point-of-care (POC) tests prior to the COVID-19 pandemic was relatively infrequent outside of the health care context. Little is known about how public opinions regarding POC tests have changed during the pandemic. Methods: We redeployed a validated survey to uncompensated volunteers to assess preferences for point-of-care testing (POCT) benefits and concerns between June and September 2022. We received a total of 292 completed surveys. Linear regression analysis was used to compare differences in survey average response scores (ARSs) from 2020 to 2022. Results: Respondent ARSs indicated agreement for all 16 POCT benefits in 2022. Of 14 POCT concerns, there were only 2 statements that respondents agreed with most frequently, which were that "Insurance might not cover the costs of the POC test" (ARS 0.9, ± 1.0) and "POC tests might not provide a definitive result" (ARS 0.1, ± 1.0). Additionally, when comparing survey responses from 2020 to 2022, we observed 8 significant trends for POCT harms and benefits. Conclusion: The public's opinion on POC tests has become more favorable over time. However, concerns regarding the affordability and reliability of POCT results persist. We suggest that stakeholders address these concerns by developing accurate POC tests that continue to improve care and facilitate access to health care for all.
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.