ArticleGlobal public health2013
'… in the project they really care for us': meaning and experiences of participating in a clinical study of first-line treatment for malaria and HIV in Tanzanian adults.
Article in Global public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Participation of Ghanaian pregnant women in an antimalarial drug trial: willingness, experiences and perceptions.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2021Article
- Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Critiques of biomedical research in low-resource settings typically centre on clinical trials and the 'dissymmetries of power' between the researched and those benefiting from the products of research. It is important to extend this critical lens to other forms of global health research. We conducted a qualitative study in Tanzania to explore meaning and experiences of participating in a clinical observational study evaluating the safety and efficacy of current practice for treating HIV and malaria co-infection. Focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were undertaken with 124 study participants, study staff and health workers. Participants' understanding of the study's research aims was limited, but the practice of participation - engaging with research staff and materials - appeared to facilitate interpretations of the study's value, conceptualised as a 'service'. For those peripheral to the study, however, interpretations of it reflected existing suspicions of experimental research. Our findings indicate the importance of considering the expectations, roles and responsibilities constructed through the practice of participation in different types of research, and how they relate to legacies of research. Understanding how networks of research practice intersect local social and historical contexts can extend discussions of collaboration and engagement with research in low-resource settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.