The role of community engagement in promoting research participants' understanding of pharmacogenomic research results: Perspectives of stakeholders involved in HIV/AIDS research and treatment.

Community engagement (CE) is praised to be a powerful vehicle in empowering communities with knowledge and skills to make informed decisions for better health care. Several CE approaches have been proposed to improve participants' and research communities' understanding of genomic research including pharmacogenomic information and results. However, there is limited literature on how these approaches can be used to communicate findings of pharmacogenomic research to communities of people living with HIV. This study explored stakeholders' perspectives on the role of community engagement in promoting understanding of pharmacogenomic research results among people living with HIV. We adopted a qualitative approach that involved 54 stakeholders between September 2021 and February 2022. We held five focus group discussions among 30 community representatives from five research institutions, 12 key informant interviews among researchers, and 12 in-depth interviews among ethics committee members. A thematic approach was used to analyze the results. Five themes merged from this data and these included (i) benefits of engaging communities prior to returning individual pharmacogenomic research results to participants. (ii) Obtaining community consensus on the kinds of pharmacogenomic results to be returned. (iii) Opinions on how pharmacogenomic research information and results should be communicated at community and individual levels. (iv) Perceived roles of community stakeholders in promoting participants' understanding and utilization of pharmacogenomic research results. (v) Perceived challenges of engaging communities when returning individual results to research participants. Stakeholders opined that CE facilitates co-learning between researchers and research communities. Researchers can adapt existing CE approaches that are culturally acceptable for meaningful engagement with minimal ethical and social risks when communicating pharmacogenomic research results. CE approaches can facilitate understanding of pharmacogenomic research and findings among research participants and communities. Therefore, if creatively adapted, existing and new CE approaches can enable researchers to communicate simple and understandable results of pharmacogenomic research.

Research Participants' Preferences for Individual Results of Pharmacogenomics Research: A Case of a Ugandan HIV Research Institute.

Little is known about whether people living with HIV would like to receive their results from pharmacogenomics research. This study explored the factors influencing participants' preferences and the reasons for their desire to receive individual results from pharmacogenomics research. We employed a convergent parallel mixed methods study design comprising a survey of 225 research participants and 5 deliberative focus group discussions with 30 purposively selected research participants. Almost all (98%) participants wanted to receive individual pharmacogenomics research results. Reasons for the desire to receive results were reciprocity for valuable time and effort, preparing for future eventualities, and the right to information about their health. Overall, participants desire to receive feedback from pharmacogenomics research, particularly if results are well established and clinically actionable.

Benefit sharing in genomic and biobanking research in Uganda: Perceptions of researchers and research ethics committee members.

Background: Genomic and biobanking research has increased in Africa over the past few years. This has raised pertinent ethical, legal, and societal concerns for stakeholders such as sample or data ownership, commercialization, and benefit sharing. There is limited awareness of the concept of benefit sharing by stakeholders in sub-Saharan Africa. Objective: This study aimed to explore the perceptions of researchers and research ethics committee members on benefit sharing in international collaborative genomic and biobanking research. Methods: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 researchers and 19 research ethics committee members. A thematic approach was used to interpret the results. Results: Six themes emerged from the data and these included perceptions on the benefits of genomic and biobanking research; discussion of benefit sharing with participants during the informed consent process; legal implications of benefit sharing and the role of material transfer agreements; equity and fairness in sharing the benefits of genomic research; perceived barriers to fair benefit sharing; and recommendations for fostering fair and equitable benefit sharing in genomic and biobanking research. Most respondents clearly understood the various forms of benefits of genomic and biobanking research and opined that such benefits should be fairly and equitably shared with low and middle-income country researchers and their institutions, and research communities. The perceived barriers to the fair benefit sharing unfavorable include power disparities, weak research regulatory frameworks, and lack of scientific integrity. Conclusion: Overall, respondents believed that the distribution of the advantages of genomic and biobanking research in North-South collaborative research was not equitable nor fair, and that the playing field was not leveled. Therefore, we advocate the following for fair and equitable benefit sharing: Building the capacities and empowering research scientists in developing nations; strengthening regulatory frameworks and extending the purview of the research ethics committee in the development and implementation of material transfer agreements; and meaningfully involving local research communities in benefit sharing negotiations.

Experiences and practices of key research team members in obtaining informed consent for pharmacogenetic research among people living with HIV: a qualitative study.

This study aimed to explore experiences and practices of key research team members in obtaining informed consent for pharmacogenetics research and to identify the approaches used for enhancing understanding during the consenting process. Data collection involved 15 qualitative, in-depth interviews with key researchers who were involved in obtaining informed consent from HIV infected individuals in Uganda for participation in pharmacogenetic clinical trials. The study explored two prominent themes: approaches used to convey information and enhance research participants' understanding and challenges faced during the consenting process. Several barriers and facilitators for obtaining consent were identified. Innovative and potentially effective consenting strategies were identified in this study that should be studied and independently verified.

Researchers experience of using the regulatory affairs information system (RAIS) in strengthening research compliance in a large research program: A case study of the Infectious Diseases Institute (IDI) in Uganda.

Objective: The aim of this study was to explore researchers' experience of using the regulatory affairs information system (RAIS) in strengthening research compliance to national ethics guidelines through tracking ethics and regulatory approvals for research projects at the Infectious Diseases Institute. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using purposive sampling of 50 participants who were principal investigators (PI) and study coordinators (SC) of active projects between November 2019 and January 2020. Only 36 of them responded to the survey. We also conducted 12 key informant interviews among PI, SC, and research management at the Institute. We used STATA 13 to analyze responses to the survey. The interviews lasted between 20 and 30 min. We used NVivo 10 software to manage the transcripts and generation of themes. Results: Majority 19 (52.8%) of those who participated in the survey were study coordinators, 19 (52.8%) had participated in more than 5 research studies, 28 (90.3%) had ever received a notification from the RAIS and 26 (92.9%) submitted requests for renewal of their studies approvals to Ethics committees and regulatory bodies 4 weeks prior to expiration dates. The study also examined participants' general understanding of the regulatory requirements and all were aware that RECs and NDA grant approval for a period of 1 year, and 35 (97.2%) that UNCST grants approval for the duration of the study. Three prominent themes; researchers' experiences, benefits, and shortcomings of RAIS were generated from the key informant interviews. Discussion: Having experience in research coupled with a novel automated system provides a platform for a better understanding of research regulatory requirements, hence compliance to the national guidelines. Conclusion: Our case study demonstrates that supporting researchers and research institutions in low resource settings with an automated system in tracking expiration dates for research approvals can facilitate compliance to national ethics guidelines.

COVID-19 may exacerbate the clinical, structural and psychological barriers to retention in care among women living with HIV in rural and peri-urban settings in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Retention of pregnant and breastfeeding women and their infants in HIV care still remains low in Uganda. Recent literature has shown that the effects of COVID-19 mitigation measures may increase disease burden of common illnesses including HIV, Tuberculosis, Malaria and other key public health outcomes such as maternal mortality. A research program was undertaken to locate disengaged HIV positive women on option B+ and supported them to reengage in care. A 1 year follow up done following the tracing revealed that some women still disengaged from care. We aimed to establish the barriers to and facilitators for reengagement in care among previously traced women on option B+, and how these could have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a cross sectional qualitative study using individual interviews conducted in June and July, 2020, a period when the COVID-19 response measures such as lockdown and restrictions on transport were being observed in Uganda. Study participants were drawn from nine peri-urban and rural public healthcare facilities. Purposive sampling was used to select women still engaged in and those who disengaged from care approximately after 1 year since they were last contacted. Seventeen participants were included. Data was analysed using the content analysis approach. RESULTS: Women reported various barriers that affected their reengagement and retention in care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These included structural barriers such as transport difficulties and financial constraints; clinical barriers which included unsupportive healthcare workers, short supply of drugs, clinic delays, lack of privacy and medicine side effects; and psychosocial barriers such as perceived or experienced stigma and non-disclosure of HIV sero-status. Supportive structures such as family, community-based medicine distribution models, and a friendly healthcare environment were key facilitators to retention in care among this group. The COVID-19 pandemic was reported to exacerbate the barriers to retention in care. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 may exacerbate barriers to retention in HIV care among those who have experienced previous disengagement. We recommend community-based models such as drop out centres, peer facilitated distribution and community outreaches as alternative measures for access to ART during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Core competencies for ethics experts in health technology assessment.

OBJECTIVES: There is no consensus on who might be qualified to conduct ethical analysis in the field of health technology assessment (HTA). Is there a specific expertise or skill set for doing this work? The aim of this article is to (i) clarify the concept of ethics expertise and, based on this, (ii) describe and specify the characteristics of ethics expertise in HTA. METHODS: Based on the current literature and experiences in conducting ethical analysis in HTA, a group of members of the Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Interest Group on Ethical Issues in HTA critically analyzed the collected information during two face-to-face workshops. On the basis of the analysis, working definitions of "ethics expertise" and "core competencies" of ethics experts in HTA were developed. This paper reports the output of the workshop and subsequent revisions and discussions online among the authors. RESULTS: Expertise in a domain consists of both explicit and tacit knowledge and is acquired by formal training and social learning. There is a ubiquitous ethical expertise shared by most people in society; nevertheless, some people acquire specialist ethical expertise. To become an ethics expert in the field of HTA, one needs to acquire general knowledge about ethical issues as well as specific knowledge of the ethical domain in HTA. The core competencies of ethics experts in HTA consist of three fundamental elements: knowledge, skills, and attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: The competencies described here can be used by HTA agencies and others involved in HTA to call attention to and strengthen ethical analysis in HTA.