1
|
Sewankambo NK, Kutyabami P. Empowering local research ethics review of antibacterial mass administration research. Infect Dis Poverty 2022; 11:103. [PMID: 36171611 PMCID: PMC9516823 DOI: 10.1186/s40249-022-01031-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2022] [Accepted: 09/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent studies using mass drug administration (MDA) of antibiotics to entire communities have focused global attention on the unique ethical challenges of MDA of antibiotics in research and public health interventions. However, there is no specific guidance for Research Ethics Committees (RECs) or Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to review such trials. We surveyed the literature to identify the unique ethical challenges and to strengthen the competencies of RECs or IRBs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in their ethical reviews of these trials. METHODS We employed a desk review. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, combining terms for "mass drug administration" with terms for "research ethics committees," "institutional review boards," and "ethics." We reviewed citations of search results to retrieve additional articles. Only articles published and indexed in the above databases up to 6 January 2022 in English were included. Abstracts (without full articles), books and articles that had exclusive veterinary and environmental focus were excluded. We synthesized the literature to identify particularly challenging ethical issues relevant to antibacterial MDA trials in LMICs. RESULTS The most challenging ethical issues can be categorised into four broad domains: determining the social value of MDA, assessing risks and benefits, engaging all stakeholders meaningfully, and study design-related ethical challenges. These four domains interact and impact each other. Together, they reveal the need for RECs/IRBs to review MDA studies through a broader lens than that of clinical trials per se. From our findings, we propose a framework to guide the RECs and IRBs in LMICs to perform the initial and continuing review of antibiotic MDA trials. We also recommend strengthening the competencies of LMIC RECs or IRBs through ongoing training and collaboration with RECs or IRBs from high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS REC/IRB review of research using MDA of antibiotics plays a critical role in assuring the ethical conduct of MDA studies. Local RECs/IRBs should be empowered to review MDA studies comprehensively and competently in order to advance scientific knowledge about MDA and promote improved global health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nelson K Sewankambo
- Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, P. O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda.
| | - Paul Kutyabami
- Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, P. O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pomeroy-Stevens A, Goldman B, Grattan K. Participatory Systems Mapping for Municipal Prioritization and Planning. J Urban Health 2022; 99:738-748. [PMID: 35798924 PMCID: PMC9263058 DOI: 10.1007/s11524-022-00654-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
Rapidly growing cities face new and compounding health challenges, leading governments and donors to seek innovative ways to support healthier, more resilient urban growth. One such approach is the systems mapping process developed by Engaging Inquiry (EI) for the USAID-funded Building Healthy Cities project (BHC) in four cities in Asia. This paper provides details on the theory and methods of the process. While systems mapping is not new, the approach detailed in this paper has been uniquely adapted to the purpose of municipal planning. Strategic stakeholder engagement, including participatory workshops with a diverse group of stakeholders, is at the core of this approach and led to deeper insights, greater buy-in, and shared understanding of the city's unique opportunities and challenges. This innovative mapping process is a powerful tool for defining municipal priorities within growing cities across the globe, where the situation is rapidly evolving. It can be used to provide evidence-based information on where to invest to gain the biggest impact on specific goals. This paper is part of a collection in this issue providing a detailed accounting of BHC's systems mapping approach across four project cities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Pomeroy-Stevens
- Building Healthy Cities Project, JSI Research & Training Institute, Inc, Arlington, VA, USA.
| | - Bailey Goldman
- Building Healthy Cities Project, Engaging Inquiry LLC, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Karen Grattan
- Building Healthy Cities Project, Engaging Inquiry LLC, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Braz Sousa L, Fricker S, Webb CE, Baldock KL, Williams CR. Citizen Science Mosquito Surveillance by Ad Hoc Observation Using the iNaturalist Platform. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:6337. [PMID: 35627874 PMCID: PMC9140400 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19106337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 05/13/2022] [Accepted: 05/18/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Citizen science mosquito surveillance has been growing in recent years due to both increasing concern about mosquito-borne disease and the increasing popularity of citizen science projects globally. Health authorities are recognising the potential importance of citizen science to expanding or enhancing traditional surveillance programs. Different programs have shown success in engaging communities to monitor species of medical importance through low-cost methods. The Mozzie Monitors project was established on iNaturalist-an open citizen science platform that allows participants to upload photos (i.e., observers) and assist identification (i.e., identifiers). This article describes the likelihood of citizen scientists submitting photos of mosquitoes, assesses user submission behaviour, and evaluates public health utility from these citizen science-derived data. From October 2018 to July 2021, the Mozzie Monitors project on iNaturalist received 2118 observations of 57 different species of mosquitoes across Australia. The number of observers in the system increased over time with more than 500 observers and 180 identifiers being active in the project since its establishment. Data showed species bias with large-bodied and colourful mosquitoes being over-represented. Analyses also indicate regional differentiation of mosquito fauna per state, seasonality of activity, and ecological information about mosquitoes. The iNaturalist citizen science platform also allows connectedness, facilitated communication and collaboration between overall users and expert entomologists, of value to medical entomology and mosquito management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Larissa Braz Sousa
- UniSA Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia; (L.B.S.); (S.F.)
- Australian Centre for Precision Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia;
| | - Stephen Fricker
- UniSA Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia; (L.B.S.); (S.F.)
- Australian Centre for Precision Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia;
| | - Cameron E. Webb
- Medical Entomology, NSW Health Pathology, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia;
- Sydney Institute for Infectious Diseases, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
| | - Katherine L. Baldock
- Australian Centre for Precision Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia;
- UniSA Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
| | - Craig R. Williams
- UniSA Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia; (L.B.S.); (S.F.)
- Australian Centre for Precision Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia;
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pérez D, Robert E, Pérez EJ, Vanlerberghe V, Lefèvre P, Ridde V. A Realist Synthesis of Community-Based Interventions in Vector-Borne Diseases. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2021; 104:1202-1210. [PMID: 33646975 PMCID: PMC8045614 DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.20-0944] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2020] [Accepted: 12/30/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Randomized control trials have provided evidence that some community-based interventions (CBIs) work in vector-borne diseases (VBDs). Conversely, there is limited evidence on how well those CBIs succeed in producing specific outcomes in different contexts. To conduct a realist synthesis for knowledge translation on this topic, we examined the extent to which realist concepts (context, mechanisms, and outcomes) and their relationships are present in the existing literature on CBIs for VBDs. Articles on CBIs were identified from prior scoping reviews of health interventions for VBDs. Content of the articles was extracted verbatim if it referred either to realist concepts or CBI features. The number of articles and the average number of words extracted per category per CBI were quantified. Content of the articles was scrutinized to inductively gather qualitative evidence on the interactions between realist concepts. We reviewed 41 articles on 17 CBIs from 12 countries. The average number of words used for mechanisms was much lower than those used for outcomes and context (309,474, and 836, respectively). The average number of words used for mechanisms increased when a CBI was described in three or more articles. There were more extensive accounts on CBI features than on mechanisms. It was difficult to gather evidence on the interactions among realist concepts from the content of the articles. Scarce reporting on mechanisms in published articles limits conducting a realist synthesis of CBIs in VBDs. More transdisciplinary research that goes beyond the biomedical paradigm is needed to boost the development of intervention mechanisms in this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dennis Pérez
- 1Instituto de Medicina Tropical Pedro Kourí, Habana, Cuba
| | - Emilie Robert
- 2ICARES and Centre de Recherche SHERPA (Institut Universitaire Au Regard des Communautés Ethnoculturelles, CIUSSS du Centre-Ouest-del'Île-de-Montréal), Montreal, Canada
| | - Elsury J Pérez
- 3Public Health Research Institute (IRSPUM), University of Montreal School of Public Health (ESPUM), University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
| | | | - Pierre Lefèvre
- 5Free-Lance Consultant in International Health, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Valéry Ridde
- 6CEPED, IRD (French Institute for Research on Sustainable Development), Université de Paris, ERL INSERM SAGESUD, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Choko AT, Roshandel G, Conserve DF, Corbett EL, Fielding K, Hemming K, Malekzadeh R, Weijer C. Ethical issues in cluster randomized trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries: an analysis of two case studies. Trials 2020; 21:314. [PMID: 32295604 PMCID: PMC7161096 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-04269-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cluster randomized trials are common in health research in low- and middle-income countries raising issues that challenge interpretation of standard ethical guidelines. While the Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomized trials provides guidance for researchers and research ethics committees, it does not explicitly focus on low- and middle-income settings. MAIN BODY In this paper, we use the lens of the Ottawa Statement to analyze two cluster randomized trials conducted in low- and middle-income settings in order to identify gaps or ethical issues requiring further analysis and guidance. The PolyIran trial was a parallel-arm, cluster trial examining the effectiveness of a polypill for prevention of cardiovascular disease in Golestan province, Iran. The PASTAL trial was an adaptive, multistage, parallel-arm, cluster trial evaluating the effect of incentives for human immunodeficiency virus self-testing and follow-up on male partners of pregnant women in Malawi. Through an in-depth case analysis of these two studies we highlight several issues in need of further exploration. First, standards for verbal consent and waivers of consent require methods for operationalization if they are to be employed consistently. Second, the appropriate choice of a control arm remains contentious. Particularly in the case of implementation interventions, locally available care is required as the comparator to address questions of comparative effectiveness. However, locally available care might be lower than standards set out in national guidelines. Third, while the need for access to effective interventions post-trial is widely recognized, it is often not possible to guarantee this upfront. Clarity on what is required of researchers and sponsors is needed. Fourth, there is a pressing need for ethics education and capacity building regarding cluster randomized trials in these settings. CONCLUSION We identify four issues in cluster randomized trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries for which further ethical analysis and guidance is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Augustine T Choko
- Malawi-Liverpool Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.,Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Gholamreza Roshandel
- Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
| | - Donaldson F Conserve
- Department of Health Promotion, Education and Behaviour, University of South Carolina, Columbia, USA
| | - Elizabeth L Corbett
- Malawi-Liverpool Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.,Department of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Katherine Fielding
- Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.,School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
| | - Karla Hemming
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Reza Malekzadeh
- Digestive Disease Research Center, Digestive Diseases Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Charles Weijer
- Rotman Institute of Philosophy, Western University, London, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Andersson N. Participatory research-A modernizing science for primary health care. J Gen Fam Med 2018; 19:154-159. [PMID: 30186727 PMCID: PMC6119794 DOI: 10.1002/jgf2.187] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2018] [Accepted: 06/04/2018] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Participatory research is the science of partnerships underlying research, concerned with research governance, ownership of research products, and relationships behind research objectives and methods. The common strand behind the quite different schools of participatory research is that research should be in respectful partnership with people; it is not about researchers working on, for, or about people. Modern participatory research embraces different philosophies through several applications. The first application addresses research objectives, with participation at different points in the research cycle. Second, modern participatory research is relevant in adaptive management, including management of primary health care. Third, participatory research is a tool for patient engagement and patient-centered outcomes in the clinical context. A fourth application is participatory research as an intervention: Participatory research moves people, and it mobilizes resources and can thus be pivotal to sustainability and for health-promoting intersectoral linkages. As primary health care is a family medicine responsibility, participatory research offers family medicine a valuable toolbox complementing the accepted clinical toolboxes. Through shared identification of problems and decisions about solutions, participatory research increases participant capacity to identify and address their own issues. Among clinicians, it enhances professional practices. In the bigger social picture, all this promotes social justice, self-determination, and knowledge utilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil Andersson
- CIET‐Participatory Research at McGillFaculty of MedicineMcGill UniversityMontrealONCanada
- Centro de Investigación de Enfermedades TropicalesUniversidad Autónoma de GuerreroAcapulcoMéxico
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
One reason for doing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is that experiments can be convincing. Early epidemiological experimenters, such as Jenner and the smallpox vaccine and Snow and his famous Broad Street pump handle, already knew the answer they were demonstrating; they used the experiments as knowledge translation devices to convince others. More sophisticated modern experiments include cluster randomised controlled trials (CRCTs) for experiments in the public health setting. The knowledge translation value remains: RCTs and CRCTs can potentially stimulate changes of practice among stakeholders. Capitalising on the knowledge translation value of RCTs requires more than the standard reporting of trials. Those who are convinced by a trial and want to act, need to know how the trial relates to their own context, what contributed to success, and what might make it even more effective. Implementation research unpacks the back-story, examining how and why an intervention worked. The Camino Verde trial of community mobilisation for control of dengue reported a significant impact on entomological indices of the Aedes aegypti vector, and on serological dengue virus infection and self-reported dengue cases. This important study should lead to studies of similar interventions in other contexts, and ultimately to changes in dengue control practices. This supplement is the back-story of the trial, providing information to help researchers and planners to make use of the trial findings. Background articles include the full protocol, a systematic review of CRCTs of approaches for Aedes aegypti control, epidemiological and entomological findings from the baseline survey, and how baseline findings were used to set up the intervention. Secondary analyses of the entomological findings examine associations with the use of the larvicide temephos, and the impact of the intervention in different conditions of water supply and seasons. Other articles describe implementation and other impacts: the underlying approach; implementation in the trial’s different social contexts; the different impact in women and men; the effects of using fish for vector control; the impact on household costs of personal protection and of cases of dengue illness; and ethical issues. We hope this supplement will increase the knowledge translation value of the Camino Verde trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Cockcroft
- CIET Trust, Gaborone, Botswana. .,Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Andersson N. Community-led trials: Intervention co-design in a cluster randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health 2017; 17:397. [PMID: 28699556 PMCID: PMC5506574 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4288-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
In conventional randomised controlled trials (RCTs), researchers design the interventions. In the Camino Verde trial, each intervention community designed its own programmes to prevent dengue. Instead of fixed actions or menus of activities to choose from, the trial randomised clusters to a participatory research protocol that began with sharing and discussing evidence from a local survey, going on to local authorship of the action plan for vector control. Adding equitable stakeholder engagement to RCT infrastructure anchors the research culturally, making it more meaningful to stakeholders. Replicability in other conditions is straightforward, since all intervention clusters used the same engagement protocol to discuss and to mobilize for dengue prevention. The ethical codes associated with RCTs play out differently in community-led pragmatic trials, where communities essentially choose what they want to do. Several discussion groups in each intervention community produced multiple plans for prevention, recognising different time lines. Some chose fast turnarounds, like elimination of breeding sites, and some chose longer term actions like garbage disposal and improving water supplies. A big part of the skill set for community-led trials is being able to stand back and simply support communities in what they want to do and how they want to do it, something that does not come naturally to many vector control programs or to RCT researchers. Unexpected negative outcomes can come from the turbulence implicit in participatory research. One example was the gender dynamic in the Mexican arm of the Camino Verde trial. Strong involvement of women in dengue control activities seems to have discouraged men in settings where activity in public spaces or outside of the home would ordinarily be considered a “male competence”. Community-led trials address the tension between one-size-fits-all programme interventions and local needs. Whatever the conventional wisdom about how prevention works at a system level, programmes have to be perceived as locally relevant and they must engage stakeholders who make them work. Locally, each participating community has to know the intervention is relevant to them; they have to want to do it. That happens much more easily if they design the programme themselves.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil Andersson
- Centro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales (CIET), Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico. .,Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|