Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39358008›Full record

ArticleSexually transmitted infections2025

An evaluation of an online STI service across London: reviewing uptake, utility and outcomes over a 4-year period.

Victoria Tittle, Sara Louise Day, Anna Tostevin, Adrian M Kelly, Jonathan Spate, Fiona Burns, Jo Gibbs, Alison Howarth, Ann Sullivan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Victoria TittleSexual Health and HIV, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK victoria.tittle@nhs.net.ORCID 0000-0002-1345-4613
Sara Louise DaySexual Health and HIV, Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6457-3877
Anna TostevinCentre for Sexual Health & HIV Research, University College London, London, UK.
Adrian M KellySexual Health London, SHL, London, UK.
Jonathan SpateSexual Health London, SHL, London, UK.
Fiona BurnsCentre for Sexual Health & HIV Research, UCL, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9105-2441
Jo GibbsInfection and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5696-0260
Alison HowarthUCL Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0597-6614
Ann SullivanSexual Health and HIV, Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSince 2018, Sexual Health London (SHL) has provided remote sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing services to London residents over 16 years of age. SHL was an asymptomatic screening service. In 2020, SHL widened access to non-urgent symptomatic testing. We undertook a 4-year evaluation on the uptake of SHL's online testing pathway and outcomes, including the association of positive chlamydia and gonorrhoea nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) outcomes with user demographics and user utility.

methodsThis is a retrospective data analysis of routine SHL clinical data from 8 January 2018 to 31 March 2022 of all STI test kit orders, focusing on HIV, chlamydia and gonorrhoea outcomes. Descriptive analysis on uptake of each stage of SHL's clinical care pathway is provided, including HIV testing outcomes. Binary logistic regression was used to examine the association between SHL user-completed online consultation information, SHL uptake and chlamydia and gonorrhoea NAAT results (negative or positive).

resultsDuring the evaluation period, there were 1 476 187 orders made by 670 293 unique users. The return rate for chlamydia and gonorrhoea NAATs was 79.5% and 67.6% for HIV blood samples. The positivity rate from sufficient samples was 4.5% for chlamydia, 1.6% for gonorrhoea and 0.3% reactivity for HIV. There were increased odds of a positive chlamydia and gonorrhoea NAAT result in non-cisgender women, those with a high number of STI orders, non-UK born and those who collected an STI test kit from a clinic-based service.

conclusionsTo date, this is the largest number of orders in an evaluation of online postal sexual health infection testing in the UK, and highest return rate of samples, suggesting acceptability of SHL for STI testing. Positivity rates for chlamydia and gonorrhoea NAAT tests are lower than national figures, which may reflect asymptomatic screening prior to 2020 and testing of non-urgent symptoms since 2020.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningSexually Transmitted DiseasesAdolescentAdultChlamydia InfectionsFemaleGonorrheaHIV InfectionsHumansInternetLondonMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSexual HealthYoung Adultdelivery of health careHIVsexual health

Identifiers

PMID39358008
PMCPMC11877036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.