Structural coercion in the context of community engagement in global health research conducted in a low resource setting in Africa

Author:

Nyirenda DeborahORCID,Sariola Salla,Kingori Patricia,Squire Bertie,Bandawe Chiwoza,Parker Michael,Desmond Nicola

Abstract

Abstract Background While community engagement is increasingly promoted in global health research to improve ethical research practice, it can sometimes coerce participation and thereby compromise ethical research. This paper seeks to discuss some of the ethical issues arising from community engagement in a low resource setting. Methods A qualitative study design focusing on the engagement activities of three biomedical research projects as ethnographic case studies was used to gain in-depth understanding of community engagement as experienced by multiple stakeholders in Malawi. Data was collected through participant observation, 43 In-depth interviews and 17 focus group discussions with community leaders, research staff, community members and research participants. Thematic analysis was used to analyse and interpret the findings. Results The results showed that structural coercion arose due to an interplay of factors pertaining to social-economic context, study design and power relations among research stakeholders. The involvement of community leaders, government stakeholders, and power inequalities among research stakeholders affected some participants’ ability to make autonomous decisions about research participation. These results have been presented under the themes of perception of research as development, research participants’ motivation to access individual benefits, the power of vernacular translations to influence research participation, and coercive power of leaders. Conclusion The study identified ethical issues in community engagement practices pertaining to structural coercion. We conclude that community engagement alone did not address underlying structural inequalities to ensure adequate protection of communities. These results raise important questions on how to balance between engaging communities to improve research participation and ensure that informed consent is voluntarily given.

Funder

Wellcome Trust

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Health Policy,Health(social science),Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Reference31 articles.

1. Slevin K, Upkong M, Helse L. Community engagement in HIV prevention trials: evolution of the field and opportunities for growth. Aids2031 Background Paper [Internet]. 2014. Available from: Http://www.path.org/publications/files/aids2031.

2. International AIDS Vaccine Initiative. Insights: The community Advisory Board: An evolving approach to CABs. 2014. Available from: http://www.iavi.org/publications.

3. Dickert N, Sugarman J. Ethical goals of community consultation in research. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:1123–7.

4. Callahan D. Individual good and common good: a communitarian approach to bioethics. Perspect Biol Med. 2003;46(4):496–507.

5. Sariola S, Simpson B. Theorising the ‘human subject’ in biomedical research: international clinical trials and bioethics discourses in contemporary Sri Lanka. Soc Sci Med. 2011;73(4):515–21.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3