ArticleHeliyon2016
Exploring informed consent in HIV clinical trials: A case study in Uganda.
Article in Heliyon, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2018Pooled it
- Readability of health research informed consent forms: case of the National Health Research Ethics Committee in Tanzania.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Decolonisation and Self-Regulation as Alternative Paths to Data Science Health Research Governance in Africa.Wellcome open research · 2025Article
- Exploring the Decision-Making Process of People Living with HIV Enrolled in Antiretroviral Clinical Trials: A Qualitative Study of Decisions Guided by Trust and Emotions.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2023Article
- Beyond translations, perspectives for researchers to consider to enhance comprehension during consent processes for health research in sub-saharan Africa: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Experiences and practices of key research team members in obtaining informed consent for pharmacogenetic research among people living with HIV: a qualitative study.Research ethics · 2022Article
- Experiences of research ethics committee members and scientists of the research protocol review process in Uganda: a case study.International health · 2020Article
- Forming and implementing community advisory boards in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- Women's views about contraception requirements for biomedical research participation.PloS one · 2019Article
- Women's Views About a Paternal Consent Requirement for Biomedical Research in Pregnancy.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn settings with low literacy levels ensuring that participants are fully-informed before they consent to participate in clinical trials is a challenge. We explored the experiences and concerns of key actors in the informed consent process in two HIV clinical trials.
methodSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 46 respondents including trial participants, research study team and research ethics committee members about their experiences during the informed consent process. Three focus group discussions were conducted with 14 Community Advisory Board (CAB) members and 17 trial participants. Data were analysed to identify key themes.
findingsThe consent process was highlighted as an important procedure by all the key actors however each group had a particular area of emphasis. Signing a consent form was given importance by research team and ethics committee members, because it provided documented evidence of a participant's willingness to join a clinical trial. Participants did not welcome the presence of a witness for a non-literate participant because understanding study information was not closely related to an ability to read and write.
conclusionThis study's findings indicated that obtaining a volunteer's signature or thumbprint on a consent form did not necessarily mean that the participant was fully-informed about the information relevant to their taking part nor that they understood all the information shared with them. Informed consent requires sufficient time in the research process to have staff trained well enough before research begins. Ensuring and gaining informed consent should be understood and treated as a relation-centred, dynamic supportive process throughout the duration of a research study.
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.