ArticlePloS one2026
Global stakeholder preferences for point-of-care HIV nucleic acid amplification tests: A conjoint study.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to assess global stakeholder preferences for key attributes of point-of-care (POC) HIV Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAAT), with the aim of informing product development to support progress toward UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets.
methodsA web-based conjoint survey was conducted in August through November 2024 among HIV clinicians, laboratory professionals, and researchers. Participants were asked to evaluate hypothetical POC HIV NAAT profiles varying by six attributes: sensitivity / limit of detection (LOD), sample-collection method, turnaround time (TAT), result format, price, and power source. Relative importance and part-worth utilities were calculated to assess trade-offs in decision-making.
resultsOne hundred three respondents from 33 countries, primarily in Africa (75%), completed the survey. The relative importance placed on the attributes in the conjoint task varied based on the setting. In community and home-based settings, participants prioritized fingerstick sample collection (25.90%) and faster TATs (28.8%), even at the expense of sensitivity (15.70%). By contrast, respondents from hospitals and health centers valued tests with high sensitivity (42.6%, 40.9%) and faster TATs (31.5%, 22.6%). Across all respondents, price (7.0%), result format (3.30%), and power source (7.25%) were less influential.
conclusionsStakeholders were willing to make trade-offs among desirable attributes, prioritizing rapid turnaround time, strong sensitivity, and fingerstick sampling over affordability, power requirements, and result format in the conjoint task. These preferences vary by level of care and by use case, underscoring the importance of aligning product features with contextual needs. Engaging stakeholders early in the design process is critical to ensure new POC HIV NAAT technologies are both acceptable and scalable in low-resource settings.
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.