scholarly journals Development of Guidelines to Improve the Effectiveness of Community Advisory Boards in Health Research

Author(s):  
Nicole P. Yuan ◽  
Brian M. Mayer ◽  
Lorencita Joshweseoma ◽  
Dominic Clichee ◽  
Nicolette I. Teufel-Shone
2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 2-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priscilla Reddy ◽  
David Buchanan ◽  
Sibusiso Sifunda ◽  
Shamagonam James ◽  
Nasheen Naidoo

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Levicatus Mugenyi ◽  
Andrew Mijumbi ◽  
Mastula Nanfuka ◽  
Collins Agaba ◽  
Fedress Kaliba ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Community engagement is a key component in health research. One of the ways health researchers ensure community engagement is through Community Advisory Boards (CABs). The capacity of CABs to properly perform their role in clinical research has not been well described in many resource limited settings. In this study, we assessed the capacity of CABs for effective community engagement in Uganda.Methods: We conducted a cross sectional study with mixed methods. We used structured questionnaires and key informant interviews (KII) to collect data from CAB members, trial investigators, and community liaison officers. For quantitative data, we used descriptive statistics while for qualitative data we used content analysis. Results: Seventy three CAB members were interviewed using structured questionnaires; 58.9% males, median age 49 years (IQR: 24-70), 71.2% had attained tertiary education, 42.5% never attended any research ethics training, only 26% had a training in human subject protection, 30.1% had training in health research, 50.7% never attended any training about the role of CABs, and 72.6% had no guidelines for their operation. On the qualitative aspect, 24 KIIs cited CAB members to have some skills and ability to understand and review study documents, offer guidance on community norms and expectations and give valuable feedback to the investigators. However, challenges like limited resources, lack of independence and guidelines, and knowledge gaps about research ethics were cited as hindrances of CABs capacity.Conclusion: Though CABs have some capacity to perform their role in the Ugandan setting, their functionality is limited by lack of resources to facilitate their work, independence, guidelines for their operations and limited knowledge.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Levicatus Mugenyi ◽  
Andrew Mijumbi ◽  
Mastula Nanfuka ◽  
Collins Agaba ◽  
Fedress Kaliba ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Community engagement is a key component in health research. One of the ways health researchers ensure community engagement is through Community Advisory Boards (CABs). The capacity of CABs to properly perform their role in clinical research has not been well described in many resource limited settings. In this study, we assessed the capacity of CABs for effective community engagement in Uganda. Methods We conducted a cross sectional study with mixed methods. We used structured questionnaires and key informant interviews (KII) to collect data from CAB members, trial investigators, and community liaison officers. For quantitative data, we used descriptive statistics while for qualitative data we used content analysis. Results Seventy three CAB members were interviewed using structured questionnaires; 58.9% males, median age 49 years (IQR 24–70), 71.2% had attained tertiary education, 42.5% never attended any research ethics training, only 26% had a training in human subject protection, 30.1% had training in health research, 50.7% never attended any training about the role of CABs, and 72.6% had no guidelines for their operation. On the qualitative aspect, 24 KIIs cited CAB members to have some skills and ability to understand and review study documents, offer guidance on community norms and expectations and give valuable feedback to the investigators. However, challenges like limited resources, lack of independence and guidelines, and knowledge gaps about research ethics were cited as hindrances of CABs capacity. Conclusion Though CABs have some capacity to perform their role in the Ugandan setting, their functionality is limited by lack of resources to facilitate their work, lack of independence, lack of guidelines for their operations and limited knowledge regarding issues of research ethics and protection of the rights of trial participants.


2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget Pratt ◽  
Khin Maung Lwin ◽  
Deborah Zion ◽  
Francois Nosten ◽  
Bebe Loff ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. e035368
Author(s):  
Godwin Pancras ◽  
Maryam Amour ◽  
Tosi Mwakyandile ◽  
Baraka Morris ◽  
Bruno F Sunguya ◽  
...  

IntroductionCommunity advisory boards (CABs) continue to gain wide use and acceptance in global health research including in HIV clinical trials. They provide means through which community concerns regarding the trial can be considered by the research team, and provide an important platform of communication between the researchers and the community about study goals. Therefore, this systematic review protocol will guide the review of qualitative evidence on the ethical roles of CABs in HIV clinical trials based on the three fundamental ethical principles: respect for the person, beneficence and justice.Methods and analysisThis systematic review of qualitative evidence will involve searching four medical databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Additionally, other relevant evidence will be obtained through hand searching and grey literature. Searches will be limited to studies published in the English language from 1989 (the year that CABs were first established in HIV clinical trials) to 2019. Articles searched will be screened by two independent authors based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included articles will be appraised for quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and followed by qualitative data extraction. Findings will be analysed based on the meta-aggregative approach with the aid of EPPI-Reviewer 4 web-based software.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval does not apply to this review. Data will be disseminated through scientific conferences and peer-reviewed journals to inform policies and stake-holders about the ethical role of CABs.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019133787.


Author(s):  
Keith A. Anderson ◽  
Holly Dabelko-Schoeny ◽  
Sokha Koeuth ◽  
Katherine Marx ◽  
Laura N. Gitlin ◽  
...  

The Lancet ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 392 ◽  
pp. S42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Zhao ◽  
Thomas Fitzpatrick ◽  
Bin Wan ◽  
Suzanne Day ◽  
Allison Mathews ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Khin Maung Lwin ◽  
Phaik Yeong Cheah ◽  
Phaik Kin Cheah ◽  
Nicholas J White ◽  
Nicholas P J Day ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ann M. Cheney ◽  
Traci H. Abraham ◽  
Steve Sullivan ◽  
Shane Russell ◽  
Dianne Swaim ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document