To test or not to test: A cross-sectional survey of the psychosocial determinants of self-testing for cholesterol, glucose, and HIV

J.E.J. Grispen, G. Ronda*, G.J. Dinant, N.K. de Vries, T. van der Weijden

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

212 Downloads (Pure)


ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Although self-tests are increasingly available and widely used, it is not clear whether their use is beneficial to the users, and little is known concerning the determinants of self-test use. The aim of this study was to identify the determinants of self-test use for cholesterol, glucose, and HIV, and to examine whether these are similar across these tests. Self-testing was defined as using in-vitro tests on body materials, initiated by consumers with the aim of diagnosing a particular disorder, condition, or risk factor for disease. METHODS: A cross-sectional Internet survey was conducted among 513 self-testers and 600 non-testers, assessing possible determinants of self-test use. The structured questionnaire was based on the Health Belief Model, Theory of Planned Behavior, and Protection Motivation Theory. Data were analyzed by means of logistic regression. RESULTS: The results revealed that perceived benefits and self-efficacy were significantly associated with self-testing for all three conditions. Other psychosocial determinants, e.g. gender, cues to action, perceived barriers, subjective norm, and moral obligation, seemed to be more test-specific. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial determinants of self-testing are not identical for all tests and therefore information about self-testing needs to be tailored to a specific test. The general public should not only be informed about advantages of self-test use but also about the disadvantages. Designers of information about self-testing should address all aspects related to self-testing to stimulate informed decision making which, in turn, will result in more effective self-test use.
Original languageEnglish
Article number112
Number of pages10
JournalBMC Public Health
Publication statusPublished - 17 Feb 2011


  • RISK
  • CARE

Cite this