1
|
Bain LE, Ngwayu Nkfusai C, Nehwu Kiseh P, Badru OA, Anne Omam L, Adeagbo OA, Desmond Ebuenyi I, Malunga G, Kongnyuy E. Community-engagement in research in humanitarian settings. Front Public Health 2023; 11:1208684. [PMID: 37663852 PMCID: PMC10470624 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1208684] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 09/05/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Luchuo Engelbert Bain
- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
- Triangle Research Foundation (TRIFT), Limbe, Cameroon
- Global South Health Services and Research (GSHS), Paris, France
| | - Claude Ngwayu Nkfusai
- Global South Health Services and Research (GSHS), Paris, France
- Department of Public Health, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
- Clinton Health Access Initiative, Yaoundé, Cameroon
| | | | | | - Lundi Anne Omam
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Oluwafemi Atanda Adeagbo
- Department of Community and Behavioral Health, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States
- Department of Sociology, Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, South Africa
| | - Ikenna Desmond Ebuenyi
- Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | | | - Eugene Kongnyuy
- United Nations Population Fund, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ormel I, Salsberg J, Hunt M, Doucet A, Hinton L, Macaulay AC, Law S. Key issues for participatory research in the design and implementation of humanitarian assistance: a scoping review. Glob Health Action 2020; 13:1826730. [PMID: 33073736 PMCID: PMC7594848 DOI: 10.1080/16549716.2020.1826730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2020] [Accepted: 09/18/2020] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Participatory approaches that engage affected populations are increasingly applied in humanitarian health programs in concert with emerging accountability frameworks and the rapid growth of research in these settings. Participatory initiatives within this domain appear to be largely adopted at an operational level and are infrequently reported as a component of research efforts. Yet the evidence of the benefits of research involving community members is growing worldwide. This is the first review of participatory research (PR) in humanitarian settings. OBJECTIVES This study sought to understand the extent to which PR values and practices have been adopted in humanitarian health programs and to explore key issues in applying PR in this context. METHODS This scoping review was based on the approach developed by Arksey and O'Malley. The search for relevant peer-reviewed articles included scientific databases, a humanitarian database, targeted journals and online resources published since 2009. Eleven articles were retrieved and reviewed to identify practices and key issues related to conducting PR in humanitarian settings. RESULTS Four key themes were identified: building trust with local research stakeholders and participants; the importance of contextual understanding; implications of collaborating with affected populations in PR, and neutrality of researchers and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). Study teams considered PR as a valued approach where there was mistrust or a need for contextualized understanding. The studies described how adaptations made during the study optimized collaboration with affected populations and how the presence of NGOs influenced the approach and results of PR. CONCLUSIONS One of the most important contributions of humanitarian health programs is to develop 'medical practices that are better adapted to the living conditions and priorities of patients who are generally ignored'. Participatory approaches, such as PR, support the development of health-related practices that are more relevant and sustainable for affected populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilja Ormel
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Jon Salsberg
- Graduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | - Matthew Hunt
- School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Alison Doucet
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Lisa Hinton
- THIS Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ann C. Macaulay
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Susan Law
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bruno W, Haar RJ. A systematic literature review of the ethics of conducting research in the humanitarian setting. Confl Health 2020; 14:27. [PMID: 32489418 PMCID: PMC7245798 DOI: 10.1186/s13031-020-00282-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2019] [Accepted: 05/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Research around humanitarian crises, aid delivery, and the impact of these crises on health and well-being has expanded dramatically. Ethical issues around these topics have recently received more attention. We conducted a systematic literature review to synthesize the lessons learned regarding the ethics of research in humanitarian crises. Methods We conducted a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to identify articles regarding the ethics of research in humanitarian contexts between January 1, 1997 and September 1, 2019. We analyzed the articles to extract key themes and develop an agenda for future research. Results We identified 52 articles that matched our inclusion criteria. We categorized the article data into five categories of analysis: 32 were expert statements, 18 were case studies, 11 contained original research, eight were literature reviews and three were book chapters. All included articles were published in English. Using a step-wise qualitative analysis, we identified 10 major themes that encompassed these concepts and points. These major themes were: ethics review process (21 articles, [40.38%]); community engagement (15 articles [28.85%]); the dual imperative, or necessity that research be both academically sound and policy driven, clinical trials in the humanitarian setting (13 articles for each, [25.0%)]; informed consent (10 articles [19.23%]); cultural considerations (6 articles, [11.54%]); risks to researchers (5 articles, [9.62%]); child participation (4 articles [7.69%]); and finally mental health, and data ownership (2 articles for each [3.85%]). Conclusions Interest in the ethics of studying humanitarian crises has been dramatically increasing in recent years. While key concepts within all research settings such as beneficence, justice and respect for persons are crucially relevant, there are considerations unique to the humanitarian context. The particular vulnerabilities of conflict-affected populations, the contextual challenges of working in humanitarian settings, and the need for ensuring strong community engagement at all levels make this area of research particularly challenging. Humanitarian crises are prevalent throughout the globe, and studying them with the utmost ethical forethought is critical to maintaining sound research principles and ethical standards.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Bruno
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, USA
| | - Rohini J Haar
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Research Fellow, Human Rights Center, School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cook N, Siddiqi N, Twiddy M, Kenyon R. Patient and public involvement in health research in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e026514. [PMID: 31076471 PMCID: PMC6528003 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026514] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2018] [Revised: 01/02/2019] [Accepted: 04/01/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Patient and public involvement (PPI) is argued to lead to higher quality health research, which is more relatable to and helps empower the public. We synthesised the evidence to look for examples of PPI in health research in low/middle-income countries (LMICs), looking at levels of involvement and impact. Additionally, we considered the impact of who was undertaking the research on the level of involvement and reported impact. DESIGN Systematic review. DATA SOURCES EMBASE, Medline and PsychINFO, along with hand-searching references, grey literature, Google search and expert advice. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Any health research with evidence of patient or public involvement, with no language restrictions dated from 1978 to 1 Dec 2017. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data relating to stage and level of involvement, as well as impact, were extracted by one researcher (NC), and a coding framework was developed using an inductive approach to examine the impact of PPI on research. Extracted data were then independently coded by a second lay researcher (RK) to validate the data being collected. Discrepancies were referred to a third independent reviewer (MT) for review and consensus reached. RESULTS Sixty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. The review revealed the most common stage for PPI was in research planning, and the most common level of involvement was collaboration. Most studies did not provide evidence of effectiveness or elaborate on the impact of PPI, and they tended to report impact from the researcher's perspective. Where impact was mentioned, this generally related to increased relevance to the community, empowerment of participants and alterations in study design. CONCLUSIONS The literature describing approaches to and impact of PPI on LMIC health research is sparse. As PPI is essential to conducting high-quality research, it should be fully reported and evaluated at the end of the research project.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Cook
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
- Hull York Medical School, York, UK
| | - Najma Siddiqi
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
- Hull York Medical School, York, UK
- Bradford District Care NHS Foundation Trust
| | - Maureen Twiddy
- Institute of Clinical and Applied Health Research, University of Hull, Hull, UK
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Browne JL, Rees CO, van Delden JJM, Agyepong I, Grobbee DE, Edwin A, Klipstein-Grobusch K, van der Graaf R. The willingness to participate in biomedical research involving human beings in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Trop Med Int Health 2019; 24:264-279. [PMID: 30565381 PMCID: PMC6850431 DOI: 10.1111/tmi.13195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Objectives To systematically review reasons for the willingness to participate in biomedical human subjects research in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Methods Five databases were systematically searched for articles published between 2000 and 2017 containing the domain of ‘human subjects research’ in ‘LMICs’ and determinant ‘reasons for (non)participation’. Reasons mentioned were extracted, ranked and results narratively described. Results Ninety‐four articles were included, 44 qualitative and 50 mixed‐methods studies. Altruism, personal health benefits, access to health care, monetary benefit, knowledge, social support and trust were the most important reasons for participation. Primary reasons for non‐participation were safety concerns, inconvenience, stigmatisation, lack of social support, confidentiality concerns, physical pain, efficacy concerns and distrust. Stigmatisation was a major concern in relation to HIV research. Reasons were similar across different regions, gender, non‐patient or patient participants and real or hypothetical study designs. Conclusions Addressing factors that affect (non‐)participation in the planning process and during the conduct of research may enhance voluntary consent to participation and reduce barriers for potential participants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joyce L Browne
- Julius Global Health, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Connie O Rees
- Julius Global Health, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes J M van Delden
- Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Irene Agyepong
- Ghana Health Service, Research and Development Division, Accra, Ghana.,Public Health Faculty, Ghana College of Physicians and Surgeons, Accra, Ghana
| | - Diederick E Grobbee
- Julius Global Health, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ama Edwin
- Department of Psychological Medicine and Mental Health, School of Medicine, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana
| | - Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch
- Julius Global Health, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Division of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
| | - Rieke van der Graaf
- Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lenglet A, Lopes-Cardozo B, Shanks L, Blanton C, Feo C, Tsatsaeva Z, Idrisov K, Bolton PA, Pintaldi G. Outcomes of an individual counselling programme in Grozny, Chechnya: a randomised controlled study. BMJ Open 2018; 8:e019794. [PMID: 30139892 PMCID: PMC6112398 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019794] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of individual counselling on functioning of clients participating in a mental health intervention in a humanitarian setting. DESIGN Randomised controlled trial. SETTING Mental health programme implemented by Médecins Sans Frontières in Grozny, Republic of Chechnya. PARTICIPANTS 168 eligible clients were randomly assigned to the intervention and waitlisted (2 months) arms between November 2014 and February 2015. INTERVENTION Individual counselling sessions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Change in functioning was measured using the Short Form 6 (SF6) and gender-specific locally adapted Chechen functioning instruments in the intervention group at the end of counselling and the waitlisted group after their waitlisted period. Unadjusted differences in gain scores (DGSs) between intervention and waitlisted groups were calculated with effect size (Cohen's d) for both tools. Linear regression compared the mean DGS in both groups. RESULTS The intervention group (n=78) improved compared with waitlisted controls (n=80) on the SF6 measures with moderate to large effect sizes: general health (DGS 12.14, d=0.52), body pain (DGS 10.26, d=0.35), social support (DGS 16.07, d=0.69) and emotional functioning (DGS 16.87, d=0.91). Similar improvement was seen using the Chechen functioning instrument score (female DGS -0.33, d=0.55; male DGS -0.40, d=0.99). Adjusted analysis showed significant improvement (p<0.05) in the intervention group for all SF6 measures and for the Chechen functioning instrument score in women but not men (p=0.07). CONCLUSIONS Individual counselling significantly improved participants' ability to function in the intervention group compared with the waitlisted group. Further research is needed to determine whether similar positive results can be shown in other settings and further exploring the impact in male clients' population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NTR4689.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annick Lenglet
- Médecins Sans Frontières, Operational Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Barbara Lopes-Cardozo
- Emergency Response and Recovery Branch, Division of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Leslie Shanks
- Médecins Sans Frontières, Operational Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Curtis Blanton
- Emergency Response and Recovery Branch, Division of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | | | | | - Kyuri Idrisov
- Psychiatry Department, Chechnya State University, Grozny, Republic of Chechnya
| | - Paul A Bolton
- Departments of International Health and Mental Health,Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Giovanni Pintaldi
- Médecins Sans Frontières, Operational Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|