ArticleThe journal of vascular access2026
Unexpected scarring following use of capillary self-blood collection device: A case report and discussion of device design.
Article in The journal of vascular access, 2026. 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.
- 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
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
Self-administered capillary blood collection devices are increasingly used in both clinical research and patient care. The Tasso+ device, a CE-certified system designed to collect 500 µL of whole blood, is generally regarded as safe and user-friendly. However, complications related to its use remain insufficiently documented. We describe the case of a female study participant who developed an unexpected wound complication after using the self-blood collection device. Although the blood collection itself was successful, the participant later required surgical treatment for a gaping lesion at the application site, which ultimately left a small permanent scar. To our knowledge, this represents a previously unreported adverse effect of the device. The case raises concerns about the interaction between device application and skin tension lines and underscores the need for further evaluation of safety aspects in self-administered blood collection systems.
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.