Literature DB >> 18025886

Personal and community benefits and harms of research: views from Rakai, Uganda.

Carrie Thiessen1, Robert Ssekubugu, Jennifer Wagman, Mohammed Kiddugavu, Maria J Wawer, Ezekiel Emanuel, Ronald Gray, David Serwadda, Christine Grady.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess what individuals in low-income countries perceive as benefits and harms of population-based HIV/STD research.
DESIGN: A total of 811 research participants, research decliners, and community opinion leaders in the Rakai District, Uganda were surveyed. Types of personal and community benefits and harms, as well as rates of reporting great personal and community benefit were assessed.
METHODS: Using logistic regression, demographic characteristics, participant and opinion leader status, use of Rakai Health Sciences Program (RHSP) services, and perceived research effects were entered as predictors of reported great personal and great community benefit.
RESULTS: Most respondents thought that RHSP research was of great personal (85%) and community (88%) benefit. The perception that the RHSP was a great personal benefit was correlated with female sex, post-secondary education, frequent use of RHSP-sponsored medical services, health knowledge gains, and increased hope for future health improvements. Persons of non-Baganda ethnicity and 30-39 year-olds were less likely to believe research was personally beneficial. Regarding research as a great community benefit was associated with reported health knowledge gains, greater hope for Rakai residents' future health, and local economic benefit. Decliners were the most likely to report a personal harm, while community opinion leaders identified community harms at the highest rates.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of Rakai residents report that HIV/STD research has enhanced their own and their communities' welfare. Different factors were associated with the belief that research is a personal versus community benefit. Variations in participant, decliner, and community opinion leader perceptions highlight inadequacies of current community consultation mechanisms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18025886     DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3282f029d3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AIDS        ISSN: 0269-9370            Impact factor:   4.177


  6 in total

1.  Global bioethics and communitarianism.

Authors:  Henk A M J ten Have
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2011-10

2.  Forms of benefit sharing in global health research undertaken in resource poor settings: a qualitative study of stakeholders' views in Kenya.

Authors:  Geoffrey M Lairumbi; Michael Parker; Raymond Fitzpatrick; Michael C English
Journal:  Philos Ethics Humanit Med       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 2.464

3.  Reciprocity-based reasons for benefiting research participants: most fail, the most plausible is problematic.

Authors:  Neema Sofaer
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 1.898

4.  Impact of a community health worker HIV treatment and prevention intervention in an HIV hotspot fishing community in Rakai, Uganda (mLAKE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Larry W Chang; Ismail Mbabali; Xiangrong Kong; Heidi Hutton; K Rivet Amico; Caitlin E Kennedy; Fred Nalugoda; David Serwadda; Robert C Bollinger; Thomas C Quinn; Steven J Reynolds; Ronald Gray; Maria Wawer; Gertrude Nakigozi
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-10-23       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Informed recruitment in partner studies of HIV transmission: an ethical issue in couples research.

Authors:  Louise-Anne McNutt; Elisa J Gordon; Anneli Uusküla
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2009-08-27       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Ethical issues in measuring biomarkers in children's environmental health.

Authors:  Peter D Sly; Brenda Eskenazi; Jenny Pronczuk; Radim Srám; Fernando Diaz-Barriga; Diego Gonzalez Machin; David O Carpenter; Simona Surdu; Eric M Meslin
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 9.031

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.