↓ Skip to main content

Young people’s perceptions of smartphone-enabled self-testing and online care for sexually transmitted infections: qualitative interview study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
300 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Young people’s perceptions of smartphone-enabled self-testing and online care for sexually transmitted infections: qualitative interview study
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3648-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine R. H. Aicken, Sebastian S. Fuller, Lorna J. Sutcliffe, Claudia S. Estcourt, Voula Gkatzidou, Pippa Oakeshott, Kate Hone, S. Tariq Sadiq, Pam Sonnenberg, Maryam Shahmanesh

Abstract

Control of sexually transmitted infections (STI) is a global public health priority. Despite the UK's free, confidential sexual health clinical services, those at greatest risk of STIs, including young people, report barriers to use. These include: embarrassment regarding face-to-face consultations; the time-commitment needed to attend clinic; privacy concerns (e.g. being seen attending clinic); and issues related to confidentiality. A smartphone-enabled STI self-testing device, linked with online clinical care pathways for treatment, partner notification, and disease surveillance, is being developed by the eSTI(2) consortium. It is intended to benefit public health, and could do so by increasing testing among populations which underutilise existing services and/or by enabling rapid provision of effective treatment. We explored its acceptability among potential users. In-depth interviews were conducted in 2012 with 25 sexually-experienced 16-24 year olds, recruited from Further Education colleges in an urban, high STI prevalence area. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Nine females and 16 males participated. 21 self-defined as Black; three, mixed ethnicity; and one, Muslim/Asian. 22 reported experience of STI testing, two reported previous STI diagnoses, and all had owned smartphones. Participants expressed enthusiasm about the proposed service, and suggested that they and their peers would use it and test more often if it were available. Utilizing sexual healthcare was perceived to be easier and faster with STI self-testing and online clinical care, which facilitated concealment of STI testing from peers/family, and avoided embarrassing face-to-face consultations. Despite these perceived advantages to privacy, new privacy concerns arose regarding communications technology: principally the risk inherent in having evidence of STI testing or diagnosis visible or retrievable on their phone. Some concerns arose regarding the proposed self-test's accuracy, related to self-operation and the technology's novelty. Several expressed anxiety around the possibility of being diagnosed and treated without any contact with healthcare professionals. Remote STI self-testing and online care appealed to these young people. It addressed barriers they associated with conventional STI services, thus may benefit public health through earlier detection and treatment. Our findings underpin development of online care pathways, as part of ongoing research to create this complex e-health intervention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 300 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 300 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 53 18%
Student > Bachelor 38 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 11%
Researcher 28 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 5%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 89 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 48 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 45 15%
Psychology 27 9%
Social Sciences 23 8%
Computer Science 13 4%
Other 46 15%
Unknown 98 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2021.
All research outputs
#916,734
of 24,213,825 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#983
of 15,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,459
of 327,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#21
of 351 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,213,825 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,953 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 351 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.