Nalubega Sylivia, Evans Catrin
Centre for Evidence Based Healthcare: a Collaborating Centre of the Joanna Briggs Institute; School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jun 12;13(5):330-420. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2051.
Human immunodeficiency virus clinical trials are increasingly being conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. There is a tension between the pressure to increase levels of research participation and the need to ensure informed consent and protection of participants' rights. Researchers need to be aware of the particular ethical issues that underpin Human immunodeficiency virus research conduct in low income settings. This necessitates hearing from those who have participated in research and who have direct experience of the research process.
This review aimed to synthesize and present the best available evidence in relation to Human immunodeficiency virus research participation in sub-Saharan Africa, based on the views and experiences of research participants.
The review included studies whose participants were current or former adult Human immunodeficiency virus research participants from sub-Saharan African countries.
Views, experiences, attitudes, understandings, perceptions and perspectives of Human immunodeficiency virus research participants in sub-Saharan Africa. Types of studies: This review considered studies that focused on qualitative data, including, but not limited to, designs such as phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory, action research and feminist research.
A three-step search strategy was utilized. Seven databases (CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE (R) 1946, ASSIA, PsychInfo, Web of Science, EMBASE, and African Index Medicus) were searched with no limitation to years of publication, followed by hand searching of reference lists. Only studies published in the English language were considered.
Methodological quality was assessed using the Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
Qualitative findings were extracted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument.
Qualitative research findings were pooled using a pragmatic meta-aggregative approach and the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument software.
Twenty-one studies were included in the review. One hundred and thirty-six findings were extracted from included studies and clustered into 14 categories based on similarities in meaning. These were further synthesized into five synthesized findings, set out below; i) Individuals are motivated to participate in Human immunodeficiency virus research due to a range of perceived benefits for themselves and others. ii) Participation in research can be associated with considerable fear and uncertainty. iii) Participation in Human immunodeficiency virus research is strongly influenced by social relationships (e.g. support or disapproval of family or friends) and social-economic and domestic factors (such as time or finances). iv). The meanings of research programs and processes are constructed within a context of existing lay beliefs, experiences and social relations associated with Human immunodeficiency virus and biomedical interventions in general. This means that local people may understand research and its processes very differently to health professionals. v) Participants' research experiences and their continued participation in Human immunodeficiency virus research are influenced by the research clinic context and the nature of their interactions with research staff.
Individuals are generally willing to participate in Human immunodeficiency virus research. However their understanding of the process can be limited, and the experience may may cause anxiety or have negative consequences. Furthermore longer-term participation may become problematic due to socio-economic pressure or social commitments.
The review suggests a need to develop better ways to explain research processes and to support participants, when/if they encounter problems. There is also a need to engage better with communities in order to educate them about HIV research programs.
All the included studies focused on experiences around research enrolment and participation (retention); however there is a complete evidence gap on experiences of trial closure.
人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)临床试验越来越多地在撒哈拉以南非洲地区开展。在增加研究参与度的压力与确保知情同意和保护参与者权利的需求之间存在矛盾。研究人员需要了解在低收入环境中开展HIV研究的特定伦理问题。这就需要听取那些参与过研究并有研究过程直接经验的人的意见。
本综述旨在基于研究参与者的观点和经验,综合并呈现撒哈拉以南非洲地区HIV研究参与方面的最佳现有证据。
该综述纳入了参与者为来自撒哈拉以南非洲国家的现任或前任成年HIV研究参与者的研究。
撒哈拉以南非洲地区HIV研究参与者的观点、经验、态度、理解、认知和看法。研究类型:本综述考虑了侧重于定性数据的研究,包括但不限于现象学、民族志、扎根理论、行动研究和女性主义研究等设计。
采用三步检索策略。检索了七个数据库(CINAHL、Ovid MEDLINE (R) 1946、ASSIA、PsychInfo、Web of Science、EMBASE和非洲医学索引),对发表年份无限制,随后人工检索参考文献列表。仅考虑以英文发表的研究。
使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所开发的定性评估和综述工具评估方法学质量。
使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所定性评估和综述工具提取定性研究结果。
采用务实的元聚合方法和乔安娜·布里格斯研究所定性评估和综述工具软件汇总定性研究结果。
该综述纳入了21项研究。从纳入研究中提取了136项结果,并根据意义相似性归为14类。这些结果进一步综合为以下五项综合结果:i)由于认为对自己和他人有一系列益处,个人有动力参与HIV研究。ii)参与研究可能伴随着相当大的恐惧和不确定性。iii)参与HIV研究受到社会关系(如家人或朋友的支持或反对)以及社会经济和家庭因素(如时间或资金)的强烈影响。iv)研究项目和过程的意义是在与HIV及一般生物医学干预相关的现有外行信念、经验和社会关系的背景下构建的。这意味着当地人对研究及其过程的理解可能与卫生专业人员非常不同。v)参与者的研究经历及其继续参与HIV研究受到研究诊所环境以及他们与研究人员互动性质的影响。
个人通常愿意参与HIV研究。然而,他们对研究过程的理解可能有限,且该经历可能导致焦虑或产生负面后果。此外,由于社会经济压力或社会承诺,长期参与可能会出现问题。
该综述表明需要开发更好的方法来解释研究过程,并在参与者遇到问题时/如果遇到问题为其提供支持。还需要更好地与社区互动,以便对他们进行HIV研究项目的教育。
所有纳入研究都集中在研究入组和参与(保留)方面的经验;然而,关于试验结束的经验存在完全的证据空白。