ArticleThe European journal of general practice2025
Pain and feasibility of capillary self-blood collection in general practice: A cross-sectional investigative study.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Concordance of HbA1c, creatinine, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and total cholesterol between venous and self-collected capillary blood samples sent by mail.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2026Article
- Unexpected scarring following use of capillary self-blood collection device: A case report and discussion of device design.The journal of vascular access · 2026Article
- More than a drop of blood: the paradigm shift of a large-volume capillary sample for point-of-care clinical diagnostics.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCapillary self-blood collection (SBC) with mailed samples enables remote laboratory monitoring without in-person healthcare visits. This approach may improve continuity of care for patients, especially with chronic conditions.
objectivesCompare pain perception between venous blood draws and capillary SBC and evaluate the usability and blood volume yield of SBC devices.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, general practice patients from mid of Germany, Germany performed SBC using the Tasso+
resultsOf 106 patients, 57.5% performed SBC without assistance. Self-perceived pain was lower among SBC draws (0.13, SD = 0.42) versus venous draws (1.21, SD = 1.60) (
conclusionsCapillary SBC had high feasibility and usability and caused less pain than venous draws in the general practice setting. SBC shows promises for enabling remote laboratory monitoring.
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.