ArticleAIDS research and therapy2025
A cross-sectional analysis of fingerstick blood self-microcollection for remote HIV suppression monitoring in Atlanta, Georgia, USA: a path to expanding access to continuum of care.
Article in AIDS research and therapy, 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.
- 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany people with HIV experience considerable barriers to accessing HIV clinic services. Options that would permit blood sampling that preclude the need for in-clinic visits and increase privacy would aid in overcoming many of the obstacles that hinder receiving adequate HIV care.
methodsIn Project Home-MaDE, 57 participants were evaluated for their ability to collect fingerstick blood (minimum 250 µL) in Microtainer tubes (MCT), then package and overnight mail specimens following kit instructions without assistance. Specimens were required to arrive at the laboratory within four days of collection. Plasma viral loads obtained from mailed blood were compared to matched venipuncture samples collected on the same day. For fingerstick-derived plasma, the limit of quantitation was 210 copies/mL, a benchmark relevant for Undetectable = Untransmissible prevention. A non-reactive or below-quantifiable result reflected viral suppression. Self-collected dried blood spots which have historically been used for remote blood sampling were likewise evaluated.
resultsForty-seven (82%) participants had acceptable MCT samples for testing. Ten specimens were rejected either for excessive time and temperature (n = 1) or insufficient sample volume (n = 9). Of the 34 participants who initially experienced difficulty in obtaining sufficient sample 29 elected to retry and 24 were successful. All 46 acceptable MCT plasmas tested provided accurate results as compared to the suppression levels in their matched conventional venipuncture viral loads.
conclusionUnder a rigorous protocol, plasma from mailed, self-collected fingersticks by untrained individuals were suitable for remote viral suppression monitoring. This evaluation, however, was limited to temperatures and courier service in the U.S. Approved testing options for self-collected samples may support HIV telemedicine and empower persons to overcome barriers to care services.
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.