Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21278001›Full record

Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2011

Co-enrollment in multiple HIV prevention trials - experiences from the CAPRISA 004 Tenofovir gel trial.

Quarraisha Abdool Karim, Ayesha B M Kharsany, Kasavan Naidoo, Nonhlanhla Yende, Tanuja Gengiah, Zaheen Omar, Natasha Arulappan, Koleka P Mlisana, Londiwe R Luthuli, Salim S Abdool Karim

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Addressing standards of care in resource-limited settings.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2014
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Quarraisha Abdool KarimCentre for the AIDS Program of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA), Durban, South Africa.
Ayesha B M Kharsany
Kasavan Naidoo
Nonhlanhla Yende
Tanuja Gengiah
Zaheen Omar
Natasha Arulappan
Koleka P Mlisana
Londiwe R Luthuli
Salim S Abdool Karim
Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa · ZAColumbia University · USUniversity of KwaZulu-Natal · ZA

Funding

The Viral Set Point in HIV-1 Subtype C InfectionU19AI051794 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL · PI ABDOOL KARIM, SALIM S · 2002 to 2007
$22.5M
TUBERCULOSIS SUPPLEMENTD43TW000231 · FIC · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI ABDOOL KARIM, QUARRAISHA · 1993 to 2014
$13.1M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW000231NIAID NIH HHS AI51794NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI051794
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn settings where multiple HIV prevention trials are conducted in close proximity, trial participants may attempt to enroll in more than one trial simultaneously. Co-enrollment impacts on participant's safety and validity of trial results. We describe our experience, remedial action taken, inter-organizational collaboration and lessons learnt following the identification of co-enrolled participants. EXPERIENCES: Between February and April 2008, we identified 185 of the 398 enrolled participants as ineligible. In violation of the study protocol exclusion criteria, there was simultaneous enrollment in another HIV prevention trial (ineligible co-enrolled, n=135), and enrollment of women who had participated in a microbicide trial within the past 12 months (ineligible not co-enrolled, n=50). Following a complete audit of all enrolled participants, ineligible participants were discontinued via study exit visits from trial follow-up. Custom-designed education program on co-enrollment impacting on participants' safety and validity of the trial results was implemented. Shared electronic database between research units was established to enable verification of each volunteer's trial participation and to prevent future co-enrollments. LESSONS LEARNT: Interviews with ineligible enrolled women revealed that high-quality care, financial incentives, altruistic motives, preference for sex with gel, wanting to increase their likelihood of receiving active gel, perceived low risk of discovery and peer pressure are the reasons for their enrollment in the CAPRISA 004 trial.

conclusionInstituting education programs based on the reasons reported by women for seeking enrollment in more than one trial and using a shared central database system to identify co-enrollments have effectively prevented further co-enrollments.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationAdenineAdultAfrica South of the SaharaAnti-HIV AgentsClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicFemaleGelsHIV InfectionsHumansOrganophosphonatesPatient SelectionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf ReportTenofovirYoung AdultAdenineAnti-HIV AgentsGelsOrganophosphonatesTenofovir

Identifiers

PMID21278001
PMCPMC3616246
OpenAlexW2155047880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.