ArticleBMJ public health2024
Acceptability of digital vending machines to improve access to sexual and reproductive health in Brighton, UK: a qualitative analysis.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Navigating Risk and Responsibility?": A Mixed-Methods Study Addressing Stigma and Well-Being Among Men Who Have 'Sex on Chems' with Other Men in the English Midlands.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Sexual health remains a public health priority and relies on widely available testing to enable prompt diagnosis and treatment. Technology-based approaches to distribute tests have potential to increase access and enable prompt diagnosis and treatment. We evaluated the acceptability of vending machines (VMs) to distribute HIV self-test (HIVST) and sexually transmitted infection (STI) self-sample kits, from the service user and stakeholder perspective. Methods: Six VMs were placed across Brighton and Hove (UK) in publicly accessible locations. After use, individuals received a text with an online questionnaire link. Participants completing the questionnaire were invited to a semistructured interview. Stakeholders were staff on sites where the VM was placed. Data analysis took place on NVivo, using a thematic approach. Results: 12 users completed the interview. 42% within the age 18-25 years with equal male and female identifying distributions. 33% were heterosexual, 25% homosexual and 33% bisexual. VM acceptability was high with anonymity and instant access as main benefits. Some participants expressed concern that the public location of the VM may deter others from using it. Participants found the HIVST mouth swabs were acceptable, although there was concern over accuracy. Participants welcomed being able to access comprehensive sexual health screening through a VM. Five stakeholders completed the interview. There was recognition that a publicly visible VM led to positive sexual health conversations between service users and staff. There were initial issues with restocking and machine hardwiring. Conclusions: VMs to distribute HIV and STI testing kits is acceptable to service users and stakeholders. The main reported benefits are increased confidentiality, privacy and immediate access. Further education referencing the accuracy of the HIVST mouth swab may alleviate concerns. From a stakeholder perspective, the pathway is beneficial and the role of community champions to reduce stigma is favourable.
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.