Standard of prevention for infectious diseases' prevention clinical trials during pandemics
Learning lessons for global policies from biomedical HIV prevention clinical trials and a case study of Covid-19
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22074160 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Morenike O Folayan (0000-0002-9008-7730, Obafemi Awolowo University, corresponding author), Karine Dubé (0000-0003-3458-1539, University of California San Diego), Nicaise Ndembi (0000-0001-5131-3136, University of Maryland, Baltimore) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Pages | 1539840-1539840 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-21 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Public Health (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2296-2565 • E-ISSN: 2296-2565 |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1539840 |
| PMID | 39906399 |
| OpenAlex | W4406682571 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 46 |
Lessons from biomedical HIV prevention research indicate that standard of prevention packages evolve over time, and require active engagement of stakeholders and community advocates to define packages accept to community members and trial participants. Using COVID-19 prevention research as an example, this paper discusses the reasons why a standard of prevention package must be defined for infectious diseases prevention research, what the minimum content of this package may be, the importance of stakeholder engagement in defining the package, the role of the government, and ethical considerations. As the experience from the HIV pandemic had shown, multiple ethics guidelines argue for a comprehensive standard of prevention package for biomedical HIV prevention trials that does not preclude the inclusion of newly developed HIV prevention tools including those experimental products listed for emergency use during health crisis. In the case of COVID-19, the standard of prevention package should include at a minimum, risk reduction counseling on physical distancing, provision of hand sanitizers, education on how to use available prevention tools, and provision for the possibility of vaccine-induced seropositivity. When pre-exposure prophylaxis studies are conducted for healthcare workers and home carers, personal protective equipment should be provided. Regional and country level regulatory provisions on these issues can provide critical guidance for research design and implementation
Clinical trial · Family medicine · Medical education · Men who have sex with men · Pandemic · Political science · Pre-exposure prophylaxis · Public relations · Stakeholder · Stakeholder engagement · HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk · HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions · Medicine · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Antiretroviral Prophylaxis for HIV Prevention in Heterosexual Men and Women
Antiretroviral Preexposure Prophylaxis for Heterosexual HIV Transmission in Botswana
The Past, Present, and Future of HIV Prevention
Covid-19
Preexposure Chemoprophylaxis for HIV Prevention in Men Who Have Sex with Men
Reciprocity, Justice, and Disability
Considerations for community engagement when conducting clinical trials during infectious disease emergencies in West Africa
Lessons from the Ebola epidemics and their applications for Covid‐19 pandemic response in sub‐Saharan Africa
Ethical Considerations in Determining Standard of Prevention Packages for HIV Prevention Trials
Whose results are these anyway? Reciprocity and the ethics of “giving back” after social network research
Ancillary Care in South African HIV Vaccine Trials
South African Research Ethics Committee Review of Standards of Prevention in HIV Vaccine Trial Protocols
Research, Therapy, and Bioethical Hegemony
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |