Concordancia entre autotoma y colección estándar de muestras endocervicales para identificar infecciones de trasmisión sexual en un área urbano-rural del Perú

Galvez, Tatiana Marlene; Flores, Juan; Perez, D. G.; Gutiérrez, César; Huertas, Marleny Ramos; León-Sandoval, Segundo

doi:10.17843/rpmesp.2021.381.6571

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eighty per cent of studies (36 of 45) detected newly diagnosed positive CT/GC infections and 42.2% of studies (19 of 45) measured test accuracy 16 17 20 22–55. Seventeen studies reported 2×2 table values 22 28 30–33 35 36 38–43 51–53. We excluded four studies where reference test was unclear/not reported 22 31–33…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We generated pooled diagnostic accuracy values (table 2) and SROC curves (figure 3) by sampling site and study population for CT/GC from 13 studies 28 30 32 35 38–43 51…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Preference for SS over clinician sampling ranged from 23.1% (823 of 3082) to 83.7% (429 of 512) (n=13) 28 30 32 34 42–44 49 51 52 58–60. High trust in accuracy and privacy were cited as reasons for preferring SS (n=3) 44 51 60…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk ofChlamydia trachomatisandNeisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChlamydia trachomatis(CT) andNeisseria gonorrhoeae(GC) resulted in over 200 million new sexually transmitted infections last year. Self-sampling strategies alone or combined with digital innovations (ie, online, mobile or computing technologies supporting self-sampling) could improve screening methods. Evidence on all outcomes has not yet been synthesised, so we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address this limitation.MethodsWe searched three databases (period: 1 January 2000–6 January 2023) for reports on self-sampling for CT/GC testing. Outcomes considered for inclusion were: accuracy, feasibility, patient-centred and impact (ie, changes in linkage to care, first-time testers, uptake, turnaround time or referrals attributable to self-sampling).We used bivariate regression models to meta-analyse accuracy measures from self-sampled CT/GC tests and obtain pooled sensitivity/specificity estimates. We assessed quality with Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool-2, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.ResultsWe summarised results from 45 studies reporting self-sampling alone (73.3%; 33 of 45) or combined with digital innovations (26.7%; 12 of 45) conducted in 10 high-income (HICs; n=34) and 8 low/middle-income countries (LMICs; n=11). 95.6% (43 of 45) were observational, while 4.4% (2 of 45) were randomised clinical trials.We noted that pooled sensitivity (n=13) for CT/GC was higher in extragenital self-sampling (>91.6% (86.0%–95.1%)) than in vaginal self-sampling (79.6% (62.1%–90.3%)), while pooled specificity remained high (>99.0% (98.2%–99.5%)).Participants found self-sampling highly acceptable (80.0%–100.0%; n=24), but preference varied (23.1%–83.0%; n=16).Self-sampling reached 51.0%–70.0% (n=3) of first-time testers and resulted in 89.0%–100.0% (n=3) linkages to care. Digital innovations led to 65.0%–92% engagement and 43.8%–57.1% kit return rates (n=3).Quality of studies varied.DiscussionSelf-sampling had mixed sensitivity, reached first-time testers and was accepted with high linkages to care. We recommend self-sampling for CT/GC in HICs but additional evaluations in LMICs. Digital innovations impacted engagement and may reduce disease burden in hard-to-reach populations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021262950.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We generated pooled diagnostic accuracy values (table 2) and SROC curves (figure 3) by sampling site and study population for CT/GC from 13 studies 28 30 32 35 38–43 51…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%