ABSTRACT
Human subjects research protections have historically focused on mitigating risk of harm and promoting benefits for research participants. In many low-resource settings (LRS), complex and often severe challenges in daily living, poverty, geopolitical uprisings, sociopolitical, economic, and climate crises increase the burdens of even minimal risk research. While there has been important work to explore the scope of ethical responsibilities of researchers and research teams to respond to these wider challenges and hidden burdens in global health research, less attention has been given to the ethical dilemmas and risk experienced by frontline researcher staff as they perform research-related activities in LRS. Risks such as job insecurity, moral distress, infection, or physical harm can be exacerbated during public health crises, as recently highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlight the layers of risk research staff face in LRS and present a conceptual model to characterize drivers of this risk, with particular attention to public health crises. A framework by which funders, institutions, principal investigators, and/or research team leaders can systematically consider these additional layers of risk to researchers and frontline staff is an important and needed addition to routine research proposals and protocol review.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To determine COVID-19 antibody positivity rates over time and relationships to pregnancy outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). DESIGN: With COVID-19 antibody positivity at delivery as the exposure, we performed a prospective, observational cohort study in seven LMICs during the early COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: The study was conducted among women in the Global Network for Women's and Children's Health's Maternal and Newborn Health Registry (MNHR), a prospective, population-based study in Kenya, Zambia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Bangladesh, Pakistan, India (two sites), and Guatemala. POPULATION: Pregnant women enrolled in an ongoing pregnancy registry at study sites. METHODS: From October 2020 to October 2021, standardised COVID-19 antibody testing was performed at delivery among women enrolled in MNHR. Trained staff masked to COVID-19 status obtained pregnancy outcomes, which were then compared with COVID-19 antibody results. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Antibody status, stillbirth, neonatal mortality, maternal mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: At delivery, 26.0% of women were COVID-19 antibody positive. Positivity increased over the four time periods across all sites: 13.8%, 15.4%, 21.0% and 40.9%. In the final period, positivity rates were: DRC 27.0%, Kenya 33.1%, Pakistan 32.8%, Guatemala 37.0%, Zambia 37.8%, Bangladesh 47.2%, Nagpur, India 57.4% and Belagavi, India 62.4%. Adjusting for site and maternal characteristics, stillbirth, neonatal mortality, low birthweight and preterm birth were not significantly associated with COVID-19. The adjusted relative risk (aRR) for stillbirth was 1.27 (95% CI 0.95-1.69). Postpartum haemorrhage was associated with antibody positivity (aRR 1.44; 95% CI 1.01-2.07). CONCLUSIONS: In pregnant populations in LMICs, COVID-19 antibody positivity has increased. However, most adverse pregnancy outcomes were not significantly associated with antibody positivity.