ArticleBMJ open2025
Current practices for assessing usability of novel point-of-care diagnostics for infectious diseases: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biophotonics point-of-care diagnostics in low-resource settings: a South African perspective.Journal of biomedical optics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNovel diagnostics, particularly point-of-care (POC) tests, play a crucial role in the early detection and management of infectious diseases, especially in resource-limited settings. Ensuring test performance and quality while minimising the risk of human error becomes more relevant when shifting testing tasks from highly controlled settings like centralised laboratories to people with minimal training. Applying usability and human factors engineering principles can reduce the challenges related to human errors. Despite existing frameworks and tools, the practical application of usability guidelines remains variable across different settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review protocol outlines a systematic investigation of current practices in assessing the usability of novel diagnostics, particularly POC tests for infectious diseases intended for use in low-income and middle-income countries. The review will analyse original research studies of all designs and product dossiers that report on the usability evaluation or validation of a diagnostic test for an infectious disease. A qualitative synthesis of the data extracted from the articles will be conducted. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols and the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for this scoping review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required because individual patient data will not be included. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.