Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19814830›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2009

Microbicides development programme: engaging the community in the standard of care debate in a vaginal microbicide trial in Mwanza, Tanzania.

Andrew Vallely, Charles Shagi, Shelley Lees, Katherine Shapiro, Joseph Masanja, Lawi Nikolau, Johari Kazimoto, Selephina Soteli, Claire Moffat, John Changalucha and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. How ethical is your clinical trial?International journal of clinical practice · 2010
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Andrew VallelyLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK. a.vallely@uq.edu.au
Charles Shagi
Shelley Lees
Katherine Shapiro
Joseph Masanja
Lawi Nikolau
Johari Kazimoto
Selephina Soteli
Claire Moffat
John Changalucha
Sheena McCormack
Richard J Hayes
Amref Health Africa · TZLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of London · GBMedical Research Council · GBMiddlesex University · MTNational Institute for Medical Research · TZ

Funding

Medical Research Council G0100137Medical Research Council G0501954
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHIV prevention research in resource-limited countries is associated with a variety of ethical dilemmas. Key amongst these is the question of what constitutes an appropriate standard of health care (SoC) for participants in HIV prevention trials. This paper describes a community-focused approach to develop a locally-appropriate SoC in the context of a phase III vaginal microbicide trial in Mwanza City, northwest Tanzania.

methodsA mobile community-based sexual and reproductive health service for women working as informal food vendors or in traditional and modern bars, restaurants, hotels and guesthouses has been established in 10 city wards. Wards were divided into geographical clusters and community representatives elected at cluster and ward level. A city-level Community Advisory Committee (CAC) with representatives from each ward has been established. Workshops and community meetings at ward and city-level have explored project-related concerns using tools adapted from participatory learning and action techniques e.g. chapati diagrams, pair-wise ranking. Secondary stakeholders representing local public-sector and non-governmental health and social care providers have formed a trial Stakeholders' Advisory Group (SAG), which includes two CAC representatives.

resultsKey recommendations from participatory community workshops, CAC and SAG meetings conducted in the first year of the trial relate to the quality and range of clinic services provided at study clinics as well as broader standard of care issues. Recommendations have included streamlining clinic services to reduce waiting times, expanding services to include the children and spouses of participants and providing care for common local conditions such as malaria. Participants, community representatives and stakeholders felt there was an ethical obligation to ensure effective access to antiretroviral drugs and to provide supportive community-based care for women identified as HIV positive during the trial. This obligation includes ensuring sustainable, post-trial access to these services. Post-trial access to an effective vaginal microbicide was also felt to be a moral imperative.

conclusionParticipatory methodologies enabled effective partnerships between researchers, participant representatives and community stakeholders to be developed and facilitated local dialogue and consensus on what constitutes a locally-appropriate standard of care in the context of a vaginal microbicide trial in this setting.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN64716212.

Indexed as

Advisory CommitteesAdministration, IntravaginalAdolescentAdultAnti-Infective AgentsClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicCommunity ParticipationDrug DesignFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHIV InfectionsHumansQuality of Health CareTanzaniaYoung AdultAnti-Infective Agents

Identifiers

PMID19814830
PMCPMC2765979
OpenAlexW2138933389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.