Building community partnerships: case studies of Community Advisory Boards at research sites in Peru, Zimbabwe, and Thailand

Morin, Stephen F.; Morfit, Simon; Maiorana, André; Aramrattana, Apinun; Goicochea, Pedro; Mutsambi, John Michael; Robbins, Jonathan; Richards, T. Anne

doi:10.1177/1740774508090211

Cited by 44 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, fewer studies conducted stakeholder engagement in middle‐ (30 studies; 27.8%) 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 and low‐income (nine studies; 8.3%) 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109 countries. The location of stakeholder engagement could not be discerned in six studies (5.6%) 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, and fifteen studies (13.9%) 16, 24, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128 conducted stakeholder engagement in multiple countries at different income levels.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Day

Blumberg

et al. 2018

J Intern AIDS Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionStakeholder engagement is an essential component of HIV clinical trials. We define stakeholder engagement as an input by individuals or groups with an interest in HIV clinical trials to inform the design or conduct of said trials. Despite its value, stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials has not been rigorously examined. The purpose of our systematic review is to examine stakeholder engagement for HIV clinical trials and compare it to the recommendations of the UNAIDS/AVAC Good Participatory Practice (GPP) guidelines.MethodsWe used the PRISMA checklist and identified English language studies describing stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials. Four databases (PubMed, Ovid, CINAHL and Web of Science) and six journals were searched, with additional studies identified using handsearching and expert input. Two independent reviewers examined citations, abstracts and full texts. Data were extracted on country, engagement methods, stakeholder types and purpose of stakeholder engagement. Based on the GPP guidelines, we examined how frequently stakeholder engagement was conducted to inform clinical trial research question development, protocol development, recruitment, enrolment, follow‐up, results and dissemination.Results and discussionOf the 917 citations identified, 108 studies were included in the analysis. Forty‐eight studies (44.4%) described stakeholder engagement in high‐income countries, thirty (27.8%) in middle‐income countries and nine (8.3%) in low‐income countries. Fourteen methods for stakeholder engagement were identified, including individual (e.g. interviews) and group (e.g. community advisory boards) strategies. Thirty‐five types of stakeholders were engaged, with approximately half of the studies (60; 55.6%) engaging HIV‐affected community stakeholders (e.g. people living with HIV, at‐risk or related populations of interest). We observed greater frequency of stakeholder engagement to inform protocol development (49 studies; 45.4%) and trial recruitment (47 studies; 43.5%). Fewer studies described stakeholder engagement to inform post‐trial processes related to trial results (3; 2.8%) and dissemination (11; 10.2%).ConclusionsOur findings identify important directions for future stakeholder engagement research and suggestions for policy. Most notably, we found that stakeholder engagement was more frequently conducted to inform early stages of HIV clinical trials compared to later stages. In order to meet recommendations established in the GPP guidelines, greater stakeholder engagement across all clinical trial stages is needed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Day

Blumberg

et al. 2018

J Intern AIDS Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, in the context of HIV public health, having the authority to make such contacts informed by surveillance data and doing so without prior community support has significant potential to undermine community support. Thus, processes like the national think tank and the local community consultations are a key element in maintaining public trust and increasing acceptability of these proposed methods for linkage, retention and re-engagement in care 15,16 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptance of the Use of HIV Surveillance Data for Care Engagement

Evans

Gorder

Morin

et al. 2015

JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Use of surveillance data including laboratory results (e.g. CD4 and HIV RNA) by public health departments to facilitate linkage, retention, and re-engagement of HIV-infected individuals in health care is on the rise. This is part of the goal of increasing the proportion of infected persons achieving virologic suppression. However, this use of surveillance data is not without controversy, particularly among some providers and people living with HIV. Methods We conducted informal discussions with key stakeholders and a literature search, and held a national think tank in November 2012, bringing together 31 representatives of the federal government, county and state officials, health care providers, and community-based organizations. A follow-up community consultation specific to San Francisco was held January 24, 2014, with 10 participants. Notes from these activities were used as data for this analysis. Results The think tank identified three strategies utilizing HIV surveillance data to aid in care engagement: 1) provider-mediated – where health department staff work with the provider of record on re-engagement, 2) electronic linkages between surveillance databases and medical records databases, and 3) direct outreach – where trained health department staff reach out to persons out of care. Participants also developed recommendations for minimizing harm, guidance on meaningful stakeholder involvement, and a consensus statement in support of the use of HIV surveillance data in care engagement. Conclusions Acceptance of the use of surveillance data for HIV care linkage, retention, and re-engagement is achievable, particularly if stakeholders have been engaged in the design, conduct, and evaluation of programs.

show abstract

“…Divergent understandings of research, ethics, consent, evidence, and biomedical procedures requires dialogue between researcher and community [22]. Recognising these challenges, biomedical researchers have drawn on participatory methodologies to promote better local understandings about clinical trial procedures [23] and involved community structures in the management of trials (CAB) [24]. Community radio is, as we have suggested, an integral aspect of the overall strategy of community engagement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘I heard about this study on the radio’: using community radio to strengthen Good Participatory Practice in HIV prevention trials

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDuring the Microbicides Development Program (MDP) 301, a clinical trial of a candidate microbicide amongst women in Johannesburg, South Africa, we used community radio to promote awareness of the trial, to inform community members about specific medical research procedures and terminologies, and to stimulate dialogue between researchers and local citizens.MethodsWe used mixed methods to undertake a retrospective analysis of the social responses to the radio shows, focusing specifically on recruitment and participation in the MDP301 trial. We collected quantitative data that describes the themes and listener responses, the costs per broadcast, and the impact of the radio broadcasts on trial recruitment. Qualitative data on local reactions to the shows was gleaned from in-depth interviews with trial participants.ResultsOver a seven-year period, 205 individual broadcasts were made on two separate community radio stations. Show themes were either specifically related to medical research issues (36%), or focused on general health issues (46%), and sexual and reproductive health, including HIV prevention (18%). 403 listeners made telephone calls to the radio station, and 12% of women enrolled as participants in MDP301 (n = 9, 385) reported that they had first heard about the trial from the radio. Qualitative interviews (n = 401) with female MDP301 participants highlighted the effects of the radio shows in making women aware of the trial, impressing them with the importance of health screening and knowledge, legitimizing trial participation, and stimulating dialogue between trial participants and their male partners.ConclusionsCommunity radio is a potent tool for raising awareness and local knowledge about medical research and, in addition to other methodologies, can be used to promote recruitment into clinical trials. We suggest that future HIV prevention trials consider an investment in community radio beyond recruitment advertisements that incorporates this into the broader community engagement plan as a key element of Good Participatory Practice in clinical trial settings.

show abstract

Building community partnerships: case studies of Community Advisory Boards at research sites in Peru, Zimbabwe, and Thailand

Abstract: In developing countries, CABs can be dynamic entities that enhance the HIV research process, assist in responding to issues involving research ethics, and prepare communities for HIV research.

Cited by 44 publications

References 17 publications

Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Acceptance of the Use of HIV Surveillance Data for Care Engagement

‘I heard about this study on the radio’: using community radio to strengthen Good Participatory Practice in HIV prevention trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About