ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2024
Barriers and facilitators of participation in syphilis vaccine trials: a qualitative analysis to inform trial design and community engagement in the United States.
Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Looking down the road: development and distribution of a future syphilis vaccine.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2026Article
- Potential Strategies for Participation and Community Engagement in Syphilis Clinical Research.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Amidst resurging syphilis infection rates, increasing efforts are being made towards development of a syphilis vaccine. This study aims to identify barriers and facilitators of syphilis vaccine trial participation among priority groups for early phase studies. We conducted interviews with English-speaking individuals ≥18 years old recruited from an infectious disease clinic, a sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing site, an online research bulletin board, and HIV community advisory boards in North Carolina from April 2021-June 2022. Eligibility criteria included STI diagnosis within 12 months, people living with HIV (PLWH), men who have sex with men, or persons engaged in transactional sex. The interview guide examined views on syphilis vaccines, trial participation, and community engagement. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded, and analysed for emergent themes using a social ecological model. Thirty individuals were interviewed, including eight (27%) women, 13 (43%) Black/African American individuals, and 19 (63%) PLWH. While 19 (63%) interviewees were interested in syphilis vaccine trial participation, 10 (33%) noted participation would depend on trial parameters; one person expressed no interest. Trial participation barriers included physical risks, time commitments, and concerns related to mistrust and mistreatment. Facilitators included advancing science, syphilis prevention, and trusting the researchers. Interviewees emphasized the importance of community involvement to inform vaccine trials, particularly amidst the lingering shadow of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. While priority groups thus expressed interest in syphilis vaccine trial participation, tailored community engagement will be essential prior to clinical trials. Additional mixed methods research is urgently needed.
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.