Trials carried out in primary care typically involve complex interventions that require considerable planning if they are to be implemented successfully. The role of the statistician in promoting both robust study design and appropriate statistical analysis is an important contribution to a multi-disciplinary primary care research group. Issues in the design of complex interventions have been addressed in the Medical Research Council's new guidance document and over the past 7 years by the Royal Statistical Society's Primary Health Care Study Group. With the aim of raising the profile of statistics and building research capability in this area, particularly with respect to methodological issues, the study group meetings have covered a wide range of topics that have been of interest to statisticians and non-statisticians alike. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the statistical issues that have arisen over the years related to the design and evaluation of trials in primary care, to provide useful examples and references for further study and ultimately to promote good practice in the conduct of complex interventions carried out in primary care and other health care settings. Throughout we have given particular emphasis to statistical issues related to the design of cluster randomised trials.

Background Community engagement (CE) is a well-established practical and scholarly field, recognised as core to the science and ethics of health research, for which researchers and practitioners have increasingly asked questions about desired standards and evaluation. In infectious disease outbreak contexts, questions may be more complex. However, it is unclear what body of knowledge has been developed for CE specifically as it applies to emerging infectious diseases. This scoping review seeks to describe (1) How CE has been conceptualised and understood; and (2) What conclusions have research teams reached on the effectiveness of CE in these settings, including challenges and facilitators. Methods We used a scoping review framework by Arksey and O’Malley (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8:19–32, 2005) to structure our review. We conducted a brainstorming session and initial trial search to inform the protocol, search terms, and strategy. Three researchers discussed, developed and applied agreed screening tools and selection criteria to the final search results. Five researchers used the screening tools to screen abstracts and full text for inclusion by consensus. Additional publications were sought from references of retrieved publications and an expert call for literature. We analysed and reported emerging themes qualitatively. Results We included 59 papers from a total of 722 articles derived from our trial and final literature searches, as well as a process of “citation chasing” and an expert call for grey literature. The core material related exclusively to health research trials during the 2014–2016 West Africa Ebola outbreak. We synthesized reports on components of effectiveness of CE to identify and propose three themes as essential elements of effective CE. Conclusions While there is a large volume of literature documenting CE activities in infectious disease research settings generally, there are few accounts of effectiveness dimensions of CE. Our review proposes three themes to facilitate the effectiveness of CE initiatives as essential elements of CE activities in infectious diseases studies: (1) Communication towards building collaborative relationships; (2) Producing contextual knowledge; and (3) Learning lessons over time. As there were relatively few in-depth accounts of CE from our literature review, documentation and accounts of CE used in health research should be prioritised.

Background Vaccine hesitancy is a complex, contested social phenomenon and existing research highlights the multifaceted role of trust in strengthening vaccine confidence. However, understanding public engagement with vaccination through the lens of (mis)trust requires more contextual evidence on trust’s qualitative determinants. This includes expanding the geographic focus beyond current studies’ focus on High Income Countries. Furthermore, obstacles remain in effectively integrating social science findings in the design of vaccine deployment strategies, and in ensuring that those who implement interventions and are affected by them are directly involved in producing knowledge about vaccination challenges. Methods We piloted a community-led ethnographic approach, training Community Health Workers (CHWs) in Kambia District, Sierra Leone, in qualitative social science methods. Methods included participant observation, participatory power mapping and rumour tracking, focus group discussions and key stakeholder interviews. CHWs, with the support of public health officials and professional social scientists, conducted research on vaccination challenges, analysed data, tested new community engagement strategies based on their findings and elicited local perspectives on these approaches. Results Our findings on vaccine confidence in five border communities highlighted three key themes: the impact of prior experiences with the health system on (mis)trust; relevance of livelihood strategies and power dynamics for vaccine uptake and access; and the contextual nature of knowledge around vaccines. Across these themes, we show how expressions of trust centered on social proximity, reliability and respect and the role of structural issues affecting both vaccine access and confidence. The pilot also highlighted the value and practical challenges to meaningfully co-designed research. Conclusion There is scope for broader application of a community-led ethnographic approach will help redesign programming that is responsive to local knowledge and experience. Involving communities and low-cadre service providers in generating knowledge and solutions can strengthen relationships and sustain dialogue to bolster vaccine confidence.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is recognised as an important public health and social problem, with far reaching consequences for women's physical and emotional health and social well-being, yet little is known about how behaviour change campaigns impact on this type of behaviour and other related abuses in Tanzania and in other sub-Saharan African countries. UZIKWASA is a civil society organization based in Pangani District in coastal Tanzania and since 2009 has conducted Behaviour Change Campaigns (BCCs) focused on promoting gender justice and effective leadership. As with other complex programmes there is a question about how such approaches affect norms and practice in relation to violence against women and girls. Drawing on longitudinal research utilising over 1000 community diary entries (hearsay ethnographies) and qualitative methods using 20 in-depth interviews and 16 focus group discussions with women and men, and adolescent girls and boys, this paper explores the ways in which UZIKWASA's programme effects change. The findings reveal personal and community narratives about gender-based and intimate partner violence as forms of retributive justice and assertion of authority by men. Drawing on gender performance as an explanation for violence, the research revealed changes in norms and practice in relation to violence against women and girls. Thus,we argue that UZIKWASA is gender-transformative by addressing gender norms, and the critical awareness amongst leaders and the community of the social construction and reconstruction of gender that creates the context for real impact on changes in behaviour.

The objective of this study was to examine the feasibility, implementation, acceptability and impact of an evidence-based specialist breast care nurse (SBN) model of care in Australia. Primary data were collected from four diverse Australian breast cancer treatment centres over a 12-month period. The design was a multicentre demonstration project. Information about the provision of care and patient needs was collected through prospective logs. Structured interviews were conducted with women who received the SBN intervention (N = 167) and with a control group of women treated prior to the intervention period (N = 133). Health professionals (N = 47) were interviewed about their experience of the SBN. Almost all women had contact with an SBN at five scheduled consultations and 67% of women in the intervention group requested at least one additional consultation with the SBN. Women in the intervention group were more likely to receive hospital fact sheets and to be told about and participate in clinical trials. Ninety-eight per cent of women reported that the availability of an SBN would affect their choice of hospital, with 48% indicating that they would recommend only a hospital with a SBN available. Health professionals reported that SBNs improved continuity of care, information and support for the women, and resulted in more appropriate referrals and use of the time of other members of the team. In conclusion, the SBN model is feasible and acceptable within diverse Australian treatment centres; there is evidence that some aspects of care were improved by the SBN.