ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluation of the service quality and diagnostic performance of syphilis self-test kits purchased from E-commerce platforms in China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Syphilis self-testing (SST) facilitates screening accessibility among key populations (such as men who have sex with men, female sex workers, etc.). SST kits are readily available on several prominent e-commerce platforms in China. This study aims to compare the differences of diagnostic performance between kits obtained online or based on facilities, which provided evidence for the expanding application of SST in China. Utilizing the HONcode standard, we developed a quality assessment scale to evaluate the service quality of online SST kits. Furthermore, we assessed the diagnostic performance of them compared with facility-based kits, using TPPA as the gold standard. The online sales data showed that the after-sales reviews for SST kits accounted for only 5.5% of HIV self-testing kits and 17% of HIV/syphilis dual-testing kits. Quality assessment results indicated scale scores ranging from 31 to 44 for these SST kits, reflecting satisfactory service quality. The sensitivity and specificity of eight online kits were 94.85%-100% and 98.90%-100%, respectively, and the nine facility-based testing kits were 91.91%-100% and 97.81%-100%, respectively. The online SST kits demonstrated satisfactory quality and diagnostic performance, which provide evidence for promoting the utilization among key populations in China.
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.