11/10/2025
Do the kits provide the information patients need to make informed decisions about testing?
A cross sectional review published in the BMJ (BMJ 2025;390:e085546) looked at information on self-test boxes.
Overall, 30 testing kits were reviewed, assessing 20 biomarkers for 19 different conditions, including hypothyroidism, iron deficiency anaemia, menopause, fertility, kidney health, bowel health, prostate health, infections (HIV, chlamydia, Group A strep, flu, covid-19), vitamin D, cholesterol and gluten sensitivity.
Information on the box to guide purchase decision was often sparse. Who should use the test and when was only present on 27% of boxes, the recommended action after the test result was on 23%, and the numerical test performance on 33%.
Only 50% explicitly stated whether the test was intended for screening, diagnosis or monitoring purposes.
Further, the use of tests for 11 out the 19 conditions was judged to be in contrary to current evidence-based guidance (in terms of intended population, frequency of testing, test threshold or approach). There were also concerns about the usability of some tests and challenges for lay people in reading and interpreting the results outside of a laboratory environment. A second team raised concerns over the accuracy claims (BMJ 2025;390:e085547)
What do patients do with the result? 90% recommended follow up with a health professional if the test was positive (and 47% recommended follow up with a health professional if the tests were normal/negative), meaning it is highly likely that patients will be seeking our help following a test result. This could potentially put us in the tricky position of being asked for advice on an inappropriate test we haven’t requested, with unclear accuracy.
By Laura Darby NB medical Blog
