"When they see us, it's like they have seen the benefits!": experiences of study benefits negotiations in community-based studies on the Kenyan Coast

Community-Partnered Research appraisal tool for conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research

Objective The aim of this study was to develop an appraisal tool to support and promote clear, accurate and transparent standards and consistency when conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research. Design Current recommendations for developing reporting guidelines was used with three key differences: (1) an analysis of existing guides, principles and published literature about community engagement, involvement and participation in research using situational and relational maps; (2) feedback and pilot-testing by a community-based research team; and (3) testing the utility and usability of the appraisal tool. Results After a series of iterative revisions, the resulting Community-Partnered Research (CPR) appraisal tool emerged into three products: an elaborate prospective format, a basic retrospective format, and a supplemental checklist format. All three versions of the CPR appraisal tool consist of 11 main question items with corresponding prompts aimed to facilitate awareness, accountability, and transparency about processes and practices employed by professional researchers and community co-researchers throughout four phases of research: (1) partnership and planning, (2) methods, (3) results and (4) sustainment. Conclusion We hope that introducing this tool will contribute to shifting individual and systematic processes and practices towards equitable partnerships, mutual trustworthiness and empowerment among professional researchers and community co-researchers and, in turn, improving the quality of co-created knowledge that benefits communities and creates social change.

The challenges and potential solutions of achieving meaningful consent amongst research participants in northern Thailand: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Achieving meaningful consent can be challenging, particularly in contexts of diminished literacy, yet is a vital part of participant protection in global health research.

METHOD

We explored the challenges and potential solutions of achieving meaningful consent through a qualitative study in a predominantly hill tribe ethnic minority population in northern Thailand, a culturally distinctive population with low literacy. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 37 respondents who had participated in scrub typhus clinical research, their family members, researchers and other key informants. A thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Our analysis identified four interrelated themes surrounding participants' ability to give consent: varying degrees of research understanding, limitations of using informal translators, issues impacting decisions to join research, and voluntariness of consent. Suggestions for achieving more meaningful consent included the use of formal translators and community engagement with research populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Participant's agency in decision making to join research should be supported, but research information needs to be communicated to potential participants in a way that they can understand. We found that improved understanding about the study and its potential benefits and harms goes beyond literacy or translation and requires attention to social and cultural factors.

Considering Risks to Researchers and Staff in Low-Resource Settings during Public Health Crises: A Proposed Conceptual Model

Human subjects research protections have historically focused on mitigating risk of harm and promoting benefits for research participants. In many low-resource settings (LRS), complex and often severe challenges in daily living, poverty, geopolitical uprisings, sociopolitical, economic, and climate crises increase the burdens of even minimal risk research. While there has been important work to explore the scope of ethical responsibilities of researchers and research teams to respond to these wider challenges and hidden burdens in global health research, less attention has been given to the ethical dilemmas and risk experienced by frontline researcher staff as they perform research-related activities in LRS. Risks such as job insecurity, moral distress, infection, or physical harm can be exacerbated during public health crises, as recently highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlight the layers of risk research staff face in LRS and present a conceptual model to characterize drivers of this risk, with particular attention to public health crises. A framework by which funders, institutions, principal investigators, and/or research team leaders can systematically consider these additional layers of risk to researchers and frontline staff is an important and needed addition to routine research proposals and protocol review.

Vulnerability and agency in research participants' daily lives and the research encounter: A qualitative case study of participants taking part in scrub typhus research in northern Thailand

BACKGROUND

Researchers have a responsibility to protect all participants, especially vulnerable participants, from harm. Vulnerability is increasingly understood to be context specific, yet limited guidance is available regarding the vulnerability and agency of research participants in different cultural settings. This study aims to explore research participants' daily vulnerability and agency, and how these interact with participants' research experiences in their own words. Researchers' views and responses were also explored.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted around two scrub typhus research studies in northern Thailand. A thematic analysis was carried out on 42 semi-structured interviews with research participants, their families, researchers and key informants.

RESULTS

The majority of the research participants belonged to a hill tribe ethnic minority group. Common challenges were related to Thai language barriers, travel difficulties, uncertain legal status, unstable employment, lack of education and healthcare. We did not identify new vulnerabilities but we found that the extent of these vulnerabilities might be underestimated or even hidden from researchers in some cases. Despite these challenges people demonstrated agency in their daily lives and were often motivated and supported in this by family members. The majority of perceived research benefits were related to healthcare and gaining knowledge, while attending follow-up visits could be a burden for some.

CONCLUSIONS

Our approach to research in culturally and socioeconomically diverse settings should be more responsive to participants' specific vulnerabilities and abilities evidenced in their daily life, rather than attributing vulnerability on the basis of membership of pre-defined 'vulnerable groups'. Researchers need to be aware and responsive towards the challenges participants face locally in order to minimise the burdens of research participation whilst allowing participants to benefit from research.

Culturally responsive research ethics: How the socio-ethical norms of Arr-nar/Kreng-jai inform research participation at the Thai-Myanmar border

Despite advances, international research ethics guidelines still tend to consist of high-level ethical principles reflecting residual influence from North American and European traditions of ethics. Local ethics committees and community advisory boards can offer more culturally-sensitive approaches to training but most institutions lack substantive practical ethics guidance to engage rich moral understandings in day-to-day research practice in diverse cultural contexts. To address this gap, we conducted an international series of qualitative research ethics case studies, linked prospectively to active research programs in diverse settings. Here, we share findings from two case studies with a research team working on malaria and hepatitis B prevention with pregnant women in clinics serving migrants along the Thai-Myanmar border. In this sociocultural ethical analysis, we consider how core ethical requirements of voluntary participation, provision of fair benefits, and understandings of research risks and burdens are shaped, enriched, and in some instances challenged, by deep-seated and widespread Burmese, Karen and Thai cultural norms known as Arr-nar (in Burmese and Karen) or Kreng-jai (in Thai), encompassing multiple meanings including consideration for others and graciousness. We offer a model illustrating how one might map ethically significant sociocultural influences across the research practice pathway and close with lessons for developing a more culturally responsive research ethics practice in other international settings.

Safeguarding research staff “in the field”: a blind spot in ethics guidelines

Across disciplines there is a large and increasing number of research projects that rely on data collection activities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, these are accompanied by an extensive range of ethical challenges. While the safeguarding of study participants is the primary aim of existing ethics guidelines, this paper argues that this “do no harm” principle should be extended to include research staff. This study is a comprehensive review of more than 80 existing ethics guidelines and protocols that reveals a lack of safeguarding research staff regarding the ethical challenges faced during data collection activities in LMICs. This is particularly the case when it comes to issues such as power imbalances, political risk, staff’s emotional wellbeing or dealing with feelings of guilt. Lead organizations are called upon to develop guiding principles that encompass the safeguarding of research staff, which are then to be adapted and translated into specific protocols and tools by institutions.

Rethinking benefit sharing in collaborative human genetic research from an Afrocommunitarian perspective

This article draws on reflections about humanness, friendliness and partiality, in the writings of Afro-communitarians to develop principles for thinking critically about why benefit sharing, what may count as benefits within the context of human research in Africa and the limits of the obligation of benefit sharing. Suppose the thinking about humanness, friendliness, and partiality in Afro-communitarianism were the foundation of human genetic research in Africa, then, individuals who have contributed to research or borne its burden would benefit from its rewards. This is even more important if participants have pressing needs that researchers and/or research institutions can help ease. A failure to aid sample contributors and data providers in need when researchers and research institutions can—as well as an indifference to the serious needs of contributors—are failures to exhibit friendliness in the relevant ways. Finally, though providing benefits to contributors can be an important way of showing humanity to them, nonetheless, this obligation is not absolute and may be limited by the stronger obligation of shared experience—to advance science. Studies are still required to inquire how well these norms will work in practice and inform regulatory and legal frameworks.

Combatting neo-Colonialism in Health Research: What can Aboriginal Health Research Ethics and Global Health Research Ethics Teach Each Other?

The ethics of research involving Aboriginal populations and low and middle-income country populations each developed out of a long history of exploitative research projects and partnerships. Commonalities and differences between the two fields have not yet been examined. This study undertook two independent literature searches for Aboriginal health research ethics and global health research ethics. Content analysis identified shared and differently emphasised ethical principles and concepts between the two fields. Shared ethical concepts like "benefit" and "capacity development" have been developed to guide collaborations in both Aboriginal health research and global health research. However, Aboriginal health research ethics gives much greater prominence to ethical principles that assist in decolonising research practice such as "self-determination", "community-control", and "community ownership". The paper argues that global health research ethics would benefit from giving greater emphasis to these principles to guide research practice, while justice as approached in global health research ethics may inform Aboriginal health research practice. With increasing attention being drawn to the need to decolonise global health research, the lessons Aboriginal health research ethics can offer may be especially timely.

'Working relationships' across difference - a realist review of community engagement with malaria research

Background: Community engagement (CE) is increasingly accepted as a critical aspect of health research, because of its potential to make research more ethical, relevant and well implemented. While CE activities linked to health research have proliferated in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs), and are increasingly described in published literature, there is a lack of conceptual clarity around how engagement is understood to 'work', and the aims and purposes of engagement are varied and often not made explicit. Ultimately, the evidence base for engagement remains underdeveloped. Methods: To develop explanations for how and why CE with health research contributes to the pattern of outcomes observed in published literature , we conducted a realist review of CE with malaria research - a theory driven approach to evidence synthesis. Results: We found that community engagement relies on the development of provisional 'working relationships' across differences, primarily of wealth, power and culture. These relationships are rooted in interactions that are experienced as relatively responsive and respectful, and that bring tangible research related benefits. Contextual factors affecting development of working relationships include the facilitating influence of research organisation commitment to and resources for engagement, and constraining factors linked to the prevailing 'dominant health research paradigm context', such as: differences of wealth and power between research centres and local populations and health systems; histories of colonialism and vertical health interventions; and external funding and control of health research. Conclusions: The development of working relationships contributes to greater acceptance and participation in research by local stakeholders, who are particularly interested in research related access to health care and other benefits. At the same time, such relationships may involve an accommodation of some ethically problematic characteristics of the dominant health research paradigm, and thereby reproduce this paradigm rather than challenge it with a different logic of collaborative partnership.

Evaluating the Impact of Incentives on Clinical Trial Participation: Protocol for a Mixed Methods, Community-Engaged Study

BACKGROUND

Monetary incentives in research are frequently used to support participant recruitment and retention. However, there are scant empirical data regarding how researchers decide upon the type and amount of incentives offered. Likewise, there is little guidance to assist study investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) in their decision-making on incentives. Monetary incentives, in addition to other factors such as the risk of harm or other intangible benefits, guide individuals' decisions to enroll in research studies. These factors emphasize the need for evidence-informed guidance for study investigators and IRBs when determining the type and amount of incentives to provide to research participants.

OBJECTIVE

The specific aims of our research project are to (1) characterize key stakeholders' views on and assessments of incentives in biomedical HIV research; (2) reach consensus among stakeholders on the factors that are considered when choosing research incentives, including consensus on the relative importance of such factors; and (3) pilot-test the use of the guidance developed via aims 1 and 2 by presenting stakeholders with vignettes of hypothetical research studies for which they will choose corresponding incentive types.

METHODS

Our 2-year study will involve monthly, active engagement with a stakeholder advisory board of people living with HIV, researchers, and IRB members. For aim 1, we will conduct a nationwide survey (N=300) among people living with HIV to understand their views regarding the incentives used in HIV research. For aim 2, we will collect qualitative data by conducting focus groups with people living with HIV (n=60) and key informant interviews with stakeholders involved in HIV research (people living with HIV, IRB members, and biomedical HIV researchers: n=36) to extend and deepen our understanding of how incentives in HIV research are perceived. These participants will also complete a conjoint analysis experiment to gain an understanding of the relative importance of key HIV research study attributes and the impact that these attributes have on study participation. The data from the nationwide survey (aim 1) will be triangulated with the qualitative and conjoint analysis data (aim 2) to create 25 vignettes that describe hypothetical HIV research studies. Finally, individuals from each stakeholder group will select the most appropriate incentive that they feel should be used in each of the 25 vignettes (aim 3).

RESULTS

The stakeholder advisory board began monthly meetings in March 2021. All study aims are expected to be completed by December 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

By studying the role of incentives in HIV clinical trial participation, we will establish a decision-making paradigm to guide the choice of incentives for HIV research and, eventually, other types of similar research and facilitate the ethical recruitment of clinical research participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04809636; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04809636.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/33608.

A systematic review on ethical challenges of 'field' research in low-income and middle-income countries: respect, justice and beneficence for research staff?

Introduction

Primary data collection in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is associated with a range of ethical complexities. Considerations on how to adequately ensure the well-being of research staff are largely neglected in contemporary ethics discourse. This systematic review aims to identify the ethical challenges that research staff across different hierarchical levels and scientific disciplines face when conducting research in LMICs.

Methods

We searched 13 electronic databases and handsearched publications in six selected journals as well as the reference lists of all included studies. No restrictions were applied with respect to the publication date, research design, and target population.

Results

23 151 studies were retrieved, 183 of which met our inclusion criteria. We identified nine different types of ethical challenges that research staff may be exposed to during field research, including (1) role conflicts that can emerge from participants’ help requests and the high level of deprivation found in certain study settings, (2) feelings of guilt and (3) detrimental mental health impacts. Further challenges were (4) sexual harassment (5) safety risks and (6) political repression, particularly in postconflict, disaster-ridden or autocratic study contexts. Additionally, studies reported (7) inadequate working conditions and (8) power imbalances within research teams, while (9) ethics boards were found to be ill equipped to anticipate and address emerging risks, thus increasing the ethical liability of researchers.

Conclusion

This review revealed several complex ethical challenges that research staff may face during data collection. In order to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal 8.8 on ‘safe and secure working environments’ and to protect research staff from harm, amendments must urgently be made to current ethical standards.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42019131013

Model for developing context-sensitive responses to vulnerability in research: managing ethical dilemmas faced by frontline research staff in Kenya

Health research in low-resource settings often involves individuals and populations defined as 'vulnerable'. There is growing attention in the literature to the ethical dilemmas that frontline research staff face while conducting such research. However, there is little documented as to how research staff might support one another in identifying and handling these dilemmas in different contexts. Over the course of conducting empirical ethics research embedded in the Childhood Acute Illness & Nutrition Network, we developed an approach to examine and respond to the ethical issues and dilemmas faced by the study teams, particularly frontline staff. In this paper we describe the specific tools and approach we developed, which centred on regular cross-team ethics reflection sessions, and share lessons learnt. We suggest that all studies involving potentially vulnerable participants should incorporate activities and processes to support frontline staff in identifying, reflecting on and responding to ethical dilemmas, throughout studies. We outline the resources needed to do this and share piloted tools for further adaptation and evaluation. Such initiatives should complement and feed into-and certainly not in any way replace or substitute for-strong institutional ethics review, safeguarding and health and safety policies and processes, as well broader staff training and career support initiatives.

Vulnerability, Agency, and the Research Encounter: Family Members' Experiences and Perceptions of Participating in an Observational Clinical Study in Kenya

Pediatric clinical research in low-resourced countries involves individuals defined as "vulnerable" in research ethics guidance. Insights from research participants can strengthen the design and oversight of studies. We share family members' perspectives and experiences of an observational clinical study conducted in one Kenyan hospital as part of an integrated empirical ethics study. Employing qualitative methods, we explored how research encounters featured in family members' care-seeking journeys. Our data reveals that children's vulnerability is intricately interwoven with that of their families, and that research processes and procedures can inadvertently add to hidden burdens for families. In research, the potential for layered and intersecting situational and structural vulnerability should be considered, and participants' agency in constrained research contexts actively recognized and protected.

What do we know about ancillary care practices in East and Southern Africa? A systematic review and meta-synthesis

Background: Despite growing calls for the provision of ancillary care to study participants during medical research, there remains a noticeable gap in ethical guidelines for medical researchers in resource-constrained settings (RCS). We reviewed recent studies to determine the extent to which ancillary care is provided in East and Southern Africa and to examine the ethical justifications researchers provide to support their views on ancillary care obligations. Methods: A systematic search for qualitative and mixed methods studies on ancillary care was conducted across MEDLINE, Embase, African Wide Information, PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Department of Bioethics and H3 Africa websites and Google Scholar were further searched. Studies conducted in East and Southern Africa between 2004 and 2020, as well as those that reported on ancillary care provided to study participants were included. All studies included in this review were evaluated for methodological quality as well as bias risk. NVivo version 12 was used for thematic analysis. Results: Overall, 4,710 articles were identified by the initial search. After the data extraction and quality assessment, 24 articles were included. Key areas presented include ancillary care approaches and the themes of researcher motivation for providing ancillary care and expectations of participants in medical research. The review shows that while some international researchers do provide ancillary care to their study participants, approaches are not standardised without consistent guidelines for ethical practice for ancillary care. We found limited empirical studies in RCS that report on ancillary care, hence findings in this review are based on single studies rather than a collection of multiple studies. Conclusions: This paper emphasizes the value of establishing ethics guidelines for medical researchers in RCS who consider provision of ancillary care to their participants, and the need to account for these ethical guidelines in medical research.

Managing ancillary care in resource-constrained settings: Dilemmas faced by frontline HIV prevention researchers in a rural area in South Africa

BACKGROUND

We describe the findings from a research ethics case study, linked with a team evaluating a package of intervention services to prevent HIV infection in adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) living in a rural and poor setting of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews (n=77) with members of the linked research team evaluating the intervention programme, programme implementing staff, AGYW enrolled in the intervention programme, caregivers, ethics committee members, Public Engagement officers, community advisory board members and community stakeholders. Data were analysed iteratively using thematic framework analysis. Themes were determined by the study aims combined with an inductive development of codes emerging from the data.

RESULTS

The findings show that the burden of providing ancillary care fell primarily on the shoulders of frontline researchers and programme staff. Dilemmas around responding to gender-based violence illustrated the limits of 'referral to services' as a solution for meeting ancillary care obligations in contexts with barriers to basic health and social services.

CONCLUSION

Our findings show important gaps in meeting ancillary care needs. Participants' needs required social and economic support which frontline researchers and implementing partners were not able to meet, causing moral distress.

Pioneering Informed Consent for Return of Research Results to Breast Cancer Patients Facing Barriers to Implementation of Genomic Medicine: The Kenyan BRCA1/2 Testing Experience Using Whole Exome Sequencing

INTRODUCTION

Obtaining informed consent from study participants and disseminating the findings responsibly is a key principle required for ethically conducted clinical and genetic research. Reports from African researchers providing feedback on insights gained during the return of whole exome sequencing (WES) results to breast cancer patients treated in resource-limited settings is lacking.

AIM

The empirical process used to fill this gap in relation to BRCA1/2 variant detection using WES provided unique insights incorporated into a pathology-supported genetic testing algorithm for return of research results to Kenyan breast cancer patients.

METHODS

The Informed consent form approved by the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Kenya was adopted from a translational research study conducted in South Africa. Initially, the informed consent process was piloted in 16 Kenyan female patients referred for breast surgery, following a community-based awareness campaign. A total of 95 female and two male breast cancer patients were enrolled in the study from 2013 to 2016. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) results of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status were obtained from hospital records. DNA of patients with a family history of cancer was extracted from saliva and screened for pathogenic variants in the BRCA1/2 genes as the first step using WES.

RESULTS

Ten patients approached for participation in this study declined to sign the informed consent form. Data on IHC used as a proxy for molecular subtype were available in 8 of 13 breast cancer patients (62%) with a family history of cancer. Five BRCA1/2 variants of uncertain clinical significance were detected, as well as a pathogenic BRCA2 variant (c.5159C > A; S1720∗) in a female patient eligible for return of WES results.

CONCLUSION

Experience gained during the qualitative pilot phase was essential to overcome challenges associated with the translation of sophisticated genetic terms into native African languages. Detection of a pathogenic BRCA2 variant in a patient with familial breast cancer, frequently associated with hormone receptor-positive breast carcinoma as reported in this case, led to a high level of confidence on which to base risk management in future. Implementation of new technologies alongside standard pathology provides a practical approach to the application of genomic medicine in Africa.

'When you are a data collector you must expect anything'. Barriers, boundaries and breakthroughs: insights from the South African data-collection experience

The impact of the research process on the researcher is an emerging topic of interest. Data collection in most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is often the responsibility of community members who are identified and trained specifically for data collection. When research involves data on mental health and social well-being, data collectors may have specific competency needs and the task of data gathering may impact data collectors. This study aims to explore the experiences and needs of data collectors within South Africa using qualitative methods to examine the impact of data collection on data collectors. Nineteen data collectors, involved in face-to-face data collection, completed semi-structured interviews exploring their insights, attitudes and experiences. Thematic analysis revealed barriers and challenges associated with research, complexities regarding boundaries within the participant-data collector relationship and the benefits of being involved with research for the individual and the community. Numerous challenges and opportunities are outlined. Findings expose the beneficial and often overlooked contribution of data collectors and warrants key considerations in the planning and implementation of future research to ensure adequate support and standardization of practice.

"Money Helps": People who inject drugs and their perceptions of financial compensation and its ethical implications

This study documents how people who inject drugs (PWID) in rural Puerto Rico perceive payments for participating in HIV epidemiological studies. In-depth interviews were conducted among a subset (n = 40) of active PWID older than 18 years of age who had been previously enrolled in a much larger study (N = 360). Findings suggest that financial compensation was the main motivation for initially enrolling in the parent study. Then, as trust in the researchers developed, participants came to perceive compensation as part of a reciprocal exchange in which they assisted researchers by providing a trustful account of their experiences and researchers reciprocated with financial support.

"I didn't have anything to decide, I wanted to help my kids"-An interview-based study of consent procedures for sampling human biological material for genetic research in rural Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Individual, comprehensive, and written informed consent is broadly considered an ethical obligation in research involving the sampling of human material. In developing countries, however, local conditions, such as widespread illiteracy, low levels of education, and hierarchical social structures, complicate compliance with these standards. As a result, researchers may modify the consent process to secure participation. To evaluate the ethical status of such modified consent strategies it is necessary to assess the extent to which local practices accord with the values underlying informed consent.

METHODS

Over a 2-week period in April 2014 we conducted semistructured interviews with researchers from a genetic research institute in rural Pakistan and families who had given blood samples for their research. Interviews with researchers focused on the institute's requirements for consent, and the researchers' strategies for and experiences with obtaining consent in the field. Interviews with donors focused on their motivation for donating samples, their experience of consent and donation, and what factors were central in their decisions to give consent.

RESULTS

Researchers often reported modifications to consent procedures suited to the local context, standardly employing oral and elder consent, and tailoring information to the social education level of donor families. Central themes in donors' accounts of their decision to consent were the hope of getting something out of their participation and their remarkably high levels of trust in the researchers. Several donor accounts indicated a degree of confusion about participation and diagnosis, resulting in misconceived expectations of therapeutic benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

We argue that while building and maintaining trusting relationships in research is important-not least in developing countries-strategies that serve this endeavor should be supplemented with efforts to ensure proper provision and understanding of relevant information, specifically about the nature of research and measures for individual consent and opt-out.

The Ethics of Health Care Delivery in a Pediatric Malaria Vaccine Trial: The Perspectives of Stakeholders From Ghana and Tanzania

This study explores ethical issues raised in providing medical care to participants and communities of low-resource settings involved in a Phase II/III pediatric malaria vaccine trial (PMVT). We conducted 52 key informant interviews with major stakeholders of an international multi-center PMVT (GSK/PATH-MVI RTS,S) (NCT00866619) in Ghana and Tanzania. Based on their stakeholder experiences, the responses fell into three main themes: (a) undue inducement, (b) community disparities, and (c) broad therapeutic misconceptions. The study identified the critical ethical aspects, from the perspectives of stakeholders, of delivering health care during a PMVT. The study showed that integrating research into health care services needs to be addressed in a manner that upholds the favorable risk-benefit ratio of research and attends to the health needs of local populations. The implementation of research should aim to improve local standards of care through building a collaborative agenda with local institutions and systems of health.

Supporting the role of community members employed as research staff: Perspectives of community researchers working in addiction research

Community researchers are laypersons who conduct research activities in their own communities. In addiction and HIV research, community researchers are valued for their insider status and knowledge. At the same time, their presence on the research team raises concerns about coercion and confidentiality when community researchers and participants know each other personally, and the work of navigating between the worlds of research and community leads to moral distress and burnout for some community researchers. In this paper, we draw upon the concept of 'moral experience' to explore the local moral worlds of community researchers in the context of addiction research. In February and March 2010, we conducted focus groups with 36 community researchers employed on community-based addiction studies in the United States to elicit perspectives on ethical and moral challenges they face in their work and insights on best practices to support their role in research. Community researchers described how their values were realized or thwarted in the context of research, and their strategies for coping with shifting identities and competing priorities. They delineated how their knowledge could be used to inform development of research protocols and help principal investigators build and maintain trust with the community researchers on their teams. Our findings contribute to current understandings of the moral experiences of community members employed in research, and inform policies and practices for the growing field of community-engaged research. Funders, research organizations, and research ethics boards should develop guidelines and standards to ensure studies have key resources in place to support community researchers and ensure quality and integrity of community-engaged work. Investigators who work with community researchers should ensure channels for frontline staff to provide input on research protocols and to create an atmosphere where challenges and concerns can be openly and safely discussed.

Gendered negotiations for research participation in community-based studies: implications for health research policy and practice

There is a growing literature documenting the complex realities of consent processes in the field, and the negotiations and ethical dilemmas involved. Much has also been written about how gender and power shape household decision-making processes. However, these bodies of literature have rarely been brought together to inform research theory and practice in low-income settings. In this paper, qualitative research (observation, focus group discussions and interviews) were used alongside large clinical community-based studies conducted on the Kenyan Coast to explore how gender and power relations within households and communities and between fieldworkers and communities shape consent processes and interactions. This exploration is embedded in relevant literature and the implications for community-based health research policy and practice are considered. Across diverse forms of households, we observed significant consultation on whether or not to participate in research. Although men are typically described as household decision-makers, in practice, decision-making processes are often far more nuanced, with many women using their agency to control, sometimes subtly, the decisions made. Where decisions are made without adequately consulting women, many find strategies to exercise their choice, in ways that safeguard important relationships within households in the longer term. We also found that the gender of field staff who typically conduct research activities in the field, including consent processes, can influence household dynamics and decision-making processes with important implications for the science and ethics of research. It is essential that frontline field staff and their supervisors are aware of the complex and gendered realities of consent processes at household level, and their implications, and that they develop appropriate context-informed approaches that support ethical practice.

Defining and Negotiating the Social Value of Research in Public Health Facilities: Perceptions of Stakeholders in a Research-Active Province of South Africa

This article reports on qualitative research conducted in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, among researchers and gate-keepers of health facilities in the province. Results suggest disparate but not irreconcilable perceptions of the social value of research in provincial health facilities. This study found that researchers tended to emphasize the contribution of research to the generation of knowledge and to the health of future patients while gate-keepers of health facilities tended to emphasize its contribution to the healthcare system and to current patients. Furthermore, relations between research stakeholders were perceived to be somewhat fragile, making it difficult for stakeholders to achieve consensus about the social value of research, as well as on ways to maximize value. Interventions to negotiate a shared perspective on the social value of research would appear to be warranted, and the findings of this study suggest some focus areas for such intervention.

"Whenever they cry, I cry with them": Reciprocal relationships and the role of ethics in a verbal autopsy study in Papua New Guinea

Verbal autopsy (VA) methods usually involve an interview with a recently bereaved individual to ascertain the most probable cause of death when a person dies outside of a hospital and/or did not receive a reliable death certificate. A number of concerns have arisen around the ethical and social implications of the use of these methods. In this paper we examine these concerns, looking specifically at the cultural factors surrounding death and mourning in Papua New Guinea, and the potential for VA interviews to cause emotional distress in both the bereaved respondent and the VA fieldworker. Thirty one semi-structured interviews with VA respondents, the VA team and community relations officers as well as observations in the field and team discussions were conducted between June 2013 and August 2014. While our findings reveal that VA participants were often moved to cry and feel sad, they also expressed a number of ways they benefited from the process, and indeed welcomed longer transactions with the VA interviewers. Significantly, this paper highlights the ways in which VA interviewers, who have hitherto been largely neglected in the literature, navigate transactions with the participants and make everyday decisions about their relationships with them in order to ensure that they and VA interviews are accepted by the community. The role of the VA fieldworker should be more carefully considered, as should the implications for training and institutional support that follow.

What Do the Various Principles of Justice Mean Within the Concept of Benefit Sharing?

The concept of benefit sharing pertains to the act of giving something in return to the participants, communities, and the country that have participated in global health research or bioprospecting activities. One of the key concerns of benefit sharing is the ethical justifications or reasons to support the practice of the concept in global health research and bioprospecting. This article evaluates one of such ethical justifications and its meaning to benefit sharing, namely justice. We conducted a systematic review to map the various principles of justice that are linked to benefit sharing and analysed their meaning to the concept of benefit sharing. Five principles of justice (commutative, distributive, global, procedural, and compensatory) have been shown to be relevant in the nuances of benefit sharing in both global health research and bioprospecting. The review findings indicate that each of these principles of justice provides a different perspective for a different benefit sharing rationale. For example, commutative justice provides a benefit sharing rationale that is focused on fair exchange of benefits between research sponsors and communities. Distributive justice produces a benefit sharing rationale that is focused on improving the health needs of the vulnerable research communities. We have suggested that a good benefit sharing framework particularly in global health research would be more beneficial if it combines all the principles of justice in its formulation. Nonetheless, there is a need for empirical studies to examine the various principles of justice and their nuances in benefit sharing among stakeholders in global health research.

Enhancing quality and integrity in biomedical research in Africa: an international call for greater focus, investment and standardisation in capacity strengthening for frontline staff

The integrity of biomedical research depends heavily on the quality of research data collected. In turn, data quality depends on processes of data collection, a task undertaken by frontline research staff in many research programmes in Africa and elsewhere. These frontline research staff often have additional responsibilities including translating and communicating research in local languages, seeking informed consent for study participation and maintaining supportive relationships between research institutions and study participants and wider communities. The level of skills that fieldworkers need to undertake these responsibilities clearly affects the quality of data collected, the ethics of research ‘on the ground’ and the short and long term acceptability of research.

We organised an international workshop in Kenya in July 2014 to discuss the role of frontline staff in scientific research. A total of 25 field managers from 9 African countries and the UK met for 2.5 days to discuss the relationship between data quality and institutional performance management systems and how they affect career progression and supportive supervision policies of research frontline staff.

From this workshop, and supporting an expanding literature on the role of fieldworkers in international health research, participants agreed that fieldworkers’ roles present them with practical and ethical challenges that their routine training does not adequately prepare them for. We argue that the common and complex challenges facing fieldworkers should in part be addressed through increased investment and collaborative agreements across types of research institutions in Africa. We call for standardization of core elements of training for this critically important cadre of research staff who perform similar roles and encounter similar challenges in many African settings. Although many valuable training elements are offered in institutions, there is a need to develop broader, more grounded and innovative strategies to address complex realities for fieldworkers, and support the integrity and ethics of health research in these settings.

Benefits in cash or in kind? A community consultation on types of benefits in health research on the Kenyan Coast

Background

Providing benefits and payments to participants in health research, either in cash or in kind, is a common but ethically controversial practice. While much literature has concentrated on appropriate levels of benefits or payments, this paper focuses on less well explored ethical issues around the nature of study benefits, drawing on views of community members living close to an international health research centre in Kenya.

Methods

The consultation, including 90 residents purposively chosen to reflect diversity, used a two-stage deliberative process. Five half-day workshops were each followed by between two and four small group discussions, within a two week period (total 16 groups). During workshops and small groups, facilitators used participatory methods to share information, and promote reflection and debate on ethical issues around types of benefits, including cash, goods, medical and community benefits. Data from workshop and field notes, and voice recordings of small group discussions, were managed using Nvivo 10 and analysed using a Framework Analysis approach.

Findings and Conclusions

The methods generated in-depth discussion with high levels of engagement. Particularly for the most-poor, under-compensation of time in research carries risks of serious harm. Cash payments may best support compensation of costs experienced; while highly valued, goods and medical benefits may be more appropriate as an ‘appreciation’ or incentive for participation. Community benefits were seen as important in supporting but not replacing individual-level benefits, and in building trust in researcher-community relations. Cash payments were seen to have higher risks of undue inducement, commercialising relationships and generating family conflicts than other benefits, particularly where payments are high. Researchers should consider and account for burdens families may experience when children are involved in research. Careful context-specific research planning and skilled and consistent communication about study benefits and payments are important, including in mitigating potential negative effects.

"The one who chases you away does not tell you go": silent refusals and complex power relations in research consent processes in Coastal Kenya

Consent processes have attracted significant research attention over the last decade, including in the global south. Although relevant studies suggest consent is a complex negotiated process involving multiple actors, most guidelines assume consent is a one-off encounter with a clear 'yes' or 'no' decision. In this paper we explore the concept of 'silent refusals', a situation where it is not clear whether potential participants want to join studies or those in studies want to withdraw from research, as they were not actively saying no. We draw on participant observation, in-depth interviews and group discussions conducted with a range of stakeholders in two large community based studies conducted by the KEMRI Wellcome Trust programme in coastal Kenya. We identified three broad inter-related rationales for silent refusals: 1) a strategy to avoid conflicts and safeguard relations within households, - for young women in particular-to appear to conform to the wishes of elders; 2) an approach to maintain friendly, appreciative and reciprocal relationships with fieldworkers, and the broader research programme; and 3) an effort to retain study benefits, either for individuals, whole households or wider communities. That refusals and underlying rationales were silent posed multiple dilemmas for fieldworkers, who are increasingly recognised to play a key interface role between researchers and communities in many settings. Silent refusals reflect and reinforce complex power relations embedded in decisions about research participation, with important implications for consent processes and broader research ethics practice. Fieldworkers need support to reflect upon and respond to the ethically charged environment they work in.