INTRODUCTION: A point of care test (POCT) for Chlamydia trachomatis detection is an urgent public health need. Technology advances in diagnostics have made solutions possible. Yet no reliable POCT exist. Our goal was to address the gap between chlamydia POCT needs and successful POCT development by determining which characteristics of POCT tests are most critical and if any flexibility in the attributes assigned those characteristics exist between technology developer and end user. METHODS: We employed a process known as WALEX (Warfare Analysis Laboratory Exercise) in combination with Design of Experiment (DOE) methodology using discrete choice experiments (DCE), to describe the attributes of the most realistic, rather than the most ideal POCT. The WALEX was conducted as interactive oral and simultaneous electronic discussion among experts with differing expertise, but linked by a common interest in development of a chlamydia POCT. RESULTS: Our studies demonstrated which features of the ideal chlamydia POCT were considered critical to test acceptance by users and which were open to negotiation. In particular, end users were more lenient on the requirement for the fastest ideal test and the lowest one time instrument costs, if the requirement for higher throughput, lowest cost and vaginal sample source collection were preserved. DOE methods used in forced choice question design provided confirmation of opinions derived from oral and electronic WALEX comments CONCLUSIONS: The WALEX in combination with DCE helped us achieve our goal in identifying the gaps in the chlamydia POCT and determining the most realistic solutions to bridge those gaps.
INTRODUCTION: A point of care test (POCT) for Chlamydia trachomatis detection is an urgent public health need. Technology advances in diagnostics have made solutions possible. Yet no reliable POCT exist. Our goal was to address the gap between chlamydia POCT needs and successful POCT development by determining which characteristics of POCT tests are most critical and if any flexibility in the attributes assigned those characteristics exist between technology developer and end user. METHODS: We employed a process known as WALEX (Warfare Analysis Laboratory Exercise) in combination with Design of Experiment (DOE) methodology using discrete choice experiments (DCE), to describe the attributes of the most realistic, rather than the most ideal POCT. The WALEX was conducted as interactive oral and simultaneous electronic discussion among experts with differing expertise, but linked by a common interest in development of a chlamydia POCT. RESULTS: Our studies demonstrated which features of the ideal chlamydia POCT were considered critical to test acceptance by users and which were open to negotiation. In particular, end users were more lenient on the requirement for the fastest ideal test and the lowest one time instrument costs, if the requirement for higher throughput, lowest cost and vaginal sample source collection were preserved. DOE methods used in forced choice question design provided confirmation of opinions derived from oral and electronic WALEX comments CONCLUSIONS: The WALEX in combination with DCE helped us achieve our goal in identifying the gaps in the chlamydia POCT and determining the most realistic solutions to bridge those gaps.
Authors: Laura van Dommelen; Frank H van Tiel; Sander Ouburg; Elfi E H G Brouwers; Peter H W Terporten; Paul H M Savelkoul; Servaas A Morré; Cathrien A Bruggeman; Christian J P A Hoebe Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Jill S Huppert; Elizabeth A Hesse; Molly A Bernard; Yang Xiao; Bin Huang; Charlotte A Gaydos; Jessica A Kahn Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2011-07-27 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; M Terry Hogan; Mathilda Barnes; Mary Jett-Goheen; Jill Huppert; Anne M Rompalo; Charlotte A Gaydos Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-11-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Charlotte A Gaydos; M Terry Hogan; O Manuel Uy; Joany Jackman; Mary Jett-Goheen; Ariel Albertie; Derek T Dangerfield; Celia R Neustadt; Zachary S Wiener; Anne M Rompalo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-04-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Penny Ford Carleton; Steven Schachter; John A Parrish; John M Collins; J Benjamin Crocker; Ronald F Dixon; Susan Edgman-Levitan; Kent B Lewandrowski; James E Stahl; Catherine Klapperich; Mario Cabodi; Charlotte A Gaydos; Anne M Rompalo; Yukari Manabe; Tza-Huei Wang; Richard Rothman; Chris D Geddes; Lea Widdice; Joany Jackman; Rishi A Mathura; Tiffani Bailey Lash Journal: IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 3.316
Authors: Sebastian S Fuller; Agata Pacho; Claire E Broad; Achyuta V Nori; Emma M Harding-Esch; Syed Tariq Sadiq Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Teodora Ec Wi; Francis J Ndowa; Cecilia Ferreyra; Cassandra Kelly-Cirino; Melanie M Taylor; Igor Toskin; James Kiarie; Nancy Santesso; Magnus Unemo Journal: J Int AIDS Soc Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 5.396