ReviewContemporary clinical trials communications2020
Parallel but connected: Nuances of conducting behavioral and social science research alongside ethically challenging HIV remission trials.
Review in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating socio-behavioral, ethics, community, and translational science considerations in HIV cure research.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2025Review
- Cohorts as collections of bodies and communities of persons: insights from the SEARCH010/RV254 research cohort.International health · 2020Article
- Comparative ethnographies of medical research: materiality, social relations, citizenship and hope in Tanzania and Sierra Leone.International health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Collaborations between clinical investigators and behavioral and social science researchers (BSSR) produce many benefits, but also may generate challenges and complexities. Ongoing relationships between teams may affect the research carried out by the BSSR team and the way they interpret their findings. Here we describe our experiences conducting the HIV Remission ('Cure') Trials Decision-Making Study (DMS), in Thailand; these trials include potentially risky interventions and interruption of standard antiretroviral treatment, with little personal benefit. The DMS is a longitudinal study of the experiences of individuals recruited to such early-phase trials, and conducted alongside these trials. It originated in clinical investigators' concerns about the ability of those recruited to make voluntary and informed decisions about scientifically complex studies, and is led by an independent group of BSSR and ethics researchers. In conducting this study, we experienced three overarching challenges to achieving a successful and dynamic collaboration: managing emerging findings as data were collected alongside clinical trial participation; evolving interconnectedness and shifting partnership boundaries among investigators; and the process of incorporating new research questions. By describing these challenges, we provide experiential evidence on how to manage multidimensional aspects of these collaborations. We describe how our research teams came together as well as the challenges and opportunities we experienced along the way. Our aim is to raise awareness of the scientific, practical, and ethical complexities of establishing and maintaining this kind of broad multidisciplinary collaboration over time. By describing our experiences, we hope to advance an agenda for others who undertake similar partnerships.
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.