MARATTO

preprint · Research Square (Research Square)

Accuracy of self-collected versus healthcare worker collected specimens for diagnosing sexually transmitted infections: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

<title>Abstract</title> The use of self-collected specimens as an alternative to healthcare worker-collected specimens for diagnostic testing has gained increasing attention in recent years. This systematic review aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected specimens compared to healthcare worker-collected specimens across different sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including chlamydia, human papillomavirus (HPV), <italic>Mycoplasma genitalium</italic> (MG), gonorrhoea, syphilis and trichomoniasis in females. A rigorous process was followed to screen for studies in various electronic databases. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. There were no studies on syphilis that met the criteria for inclusion in the review. A total of six studies for chlamydia, five studies for HPV, four studies for MG, and seven studies for gonorrhoea and trichomoniasis were included in the review. However, not all studies were included in the sub-group meta-analysis. The analysis revealed that self-collected specimens demonstrated comparable diagnostic accuracy to healthcare worker-collected specimens across most STIs. This indicates that the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected specimens can provide accurate results and enhance access to diagnostic testing, potentially improving healthcare service delivery. Future research should further explore the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected specimens in larger and more diverse populations.

Research topics

  • Reproductive tract infections research
  • Syphilis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Genital Health and Disease

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3909356/v1

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.