Beyond community engagement: perspectives on the meaningful involvement of people with HIV and affected communities (MIPA) in HIV cure research in The Netherlands

References

• Office of AIDS Research. NIH strategic plan for HIV and HIV-related research FY2021-2025. 2020. Available at: https://www.oar.nih.gov/sites/default/files/NIH_StrategicPlan_FY2021-2025.pdf (Last accessed October 19, 2023).
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Principles of community engagement. 1st ed. Atlanta (GA): CDC/ATSDR Committee on Community Engagement; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Cyril S, Smith BJ, Possamai-Inesedy A, et al. Exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Glob Health Action. 2015;8(1):29842.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O'Mara-Eves A, Brunton G, Oliver S, et al. The effectiveness of community engagement in public health interventions for disadvantaged groups: a meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):129.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haldane V, Chuah FLH, Srivastava A, et al. Community participation in health services development, implementation, and evaluation: a systematic review of empowerment, health, community, and process outcomes. PLoS One. 2019;14(5):e0216112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levac L, Ronis S, Cowper-Smith Y, et al. A scoping review: the utility of participatory research approaches in psychology. J Community Psychol. 2019;47(8):1865–1892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Musesengwa R, Chimbari MJ. Community engagement practices in Southern Africa: Review and thematic synthesis of studies done in Botswana, Zimbabwe and South Africa. Acta Trop. 2017;175:20–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzer J, Kass N. Understanding the supports of and challenges to community engagement in the CTSAs. Clin Transl Sci. 2015;8(2):116–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellen JM, Wallace M, Sawe FK, et al. Community engagement and investment in biomedical HIV prevention research for youth: Rationale, challenges, and approaches. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010;54 Suppl 1:S7–S11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeShields RD, Lucas JP, Turner M, et al. Building partnerships and stakeholder relationships for HIV prevention: longitudinal cohort study focuses on community engagement. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2020;14(1):29–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brockman TA, Shaw O, Wiepert L, et al. Community engagement strategies to promote recruitment and participation in clinical research among rural communities: a narrative review. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023;7(1):e84.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lo YR, Chu C, Ananworanich J, et al. Stakeholder engagement in HIV cure research: Lessons learned from other HIV interventions and the way forward. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2015;29(7):389–399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh JA, Mills EJ. The abandoned trials of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV: what went wrong? PLoS Med. 2005;2(9):e234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacQueen KM, Bhan A, Frohlich J, et al. Evaluating community engagement in global health research: the need for metrics. BMC Med Ethics. 2015;16(1):44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pratt B. Social justice and the ethical goals of community engagement in global health research. J Bioeth Inq. 2019;16(4):571–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau JSY, Smith MZ, Allan B, et al. Time for revolution? Enhancing meaningful involvement of people living with HIV and affected communities in HIV cure-focused science. J Virus Erad. 2020;6(4):100018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Advisory Committee of the People with AIDS. The Denver principles (statement from the Advisory Committee on People with AIDS). 1983. Available at: https://data.unaids.org/pub/externaldocument/2007/gipa1983denverprinciples_en.pdf (Last accessed October 16, 2023).
   Google Scholar
• UNAIDS. The greater involvement of people living with HIV (GIPA): UNAIDS policy brief. Geneva: UNAIDS; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Seroproject. The Denver principles. 2016. Available at: https://www.seroproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/denver_principles-FINAL.pdf (Last accessed October 16, 2023).
   Google Scholar
• Pantelic M, Steinert JI, Ayala G, et al. Addressing epistemic injustice in HIV research: a call for reporting guidelines on meaningful community engagement. J Int AIDS Soc. 2022;25(1):e25880.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karris MY, Dubé K, Moore AA. What lessons it might teach us? Community engagement in HIV research. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2020;15(2):142–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNAIDS. Global AIDS strategy 2021–2026 - end inequalities. End AIDS. Geneva, Switzerland: UNAIDS; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Newman PA, Rubincam C. Advancing community stakeholder engagement in biomedical HIV prevention trials: principles, practices and evidence. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2014;13(12):1553–1562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter A, Greene S, Nicholson V, et al. Breaking the glass ceiling: Increasing the Meaningful Involvement of Women Living with HIV/AIDS (MIWA) in the design and delivery of HIV/AIDS services. Health Care Women Int. 2015;36(8):936–964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taffere GR, Abebe HT, Zerihun Z, et al. Systematic review of community engagement approach in research: describing partnership approaches, challenges and benefits. J Public Health (Berl.). 2023;32(2):185–205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Barr L, Palm D, et al. Putting participants at the Centre of HIV cure research. Lancet HIV. 2019;6(3):e147–e149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day S, Blumberg M, Vu T, et al. Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence. J Int AIDS Soc. 2018;21 Suppl 7(Suppl Suppl 7):e25174.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noorman MAJ, de Wit JBF, Marcos TA, et al. The importance of social engagement in the development of an HIV cure: a systematic review of stakeholder perspectives. AIDS Behav. 2023;27(11):3789–3812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunton G, Thomas J, O'Mara-Eves A, et al. Narratives of community engagement: a systematic review-derived conceptual framework for public health interventions. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):944.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubé K, Dee L, Evans D, et al. Perceptions of equipoise, risk-benefit ratios, and “otherwise healthy volunteers” in the context of early-Phase HIV cure research in the United States: a qualitative inquiry. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018;13(1):3–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Taylor J, Sylla L, et al. “Well, it’s the risk of the unknown… right?”: a qualitative study of perceived risks and benefits of HIV cure research in the United States. PLoS One. 2017;12(1):e0170112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeks SG, Archin N, Cannon P, et al. Research priorities for an HIV cure: International AIDS society global scientific strategy 2021. Nat Med. 2021;27(12):2085–2098.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Sighem AI, Wit FWNM, Boyd A, et al. Monitoring report 2023. Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection in The Netherlands. Amsterdam: Stichting HIV Monitoring; 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Romijnders KAGJ, de Groot L, Vervoort SCJM, et al. The perceived impact of an HIV cure by people living with HIV and key populations vulnerable to HIV in The Netherlands: a qualitative study. J Virus Erad. 2022;8(1):100066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stutterheim SE, Ratcliffe SE. Understanding and addressing stigma through qualitative research: four reasons why we need qualitative studies. Stigma Health. 2021;6(1):8–19.
   Google Scholar
• Kincheloe JL. Describing the bricolage: conceptualizing a new rigor in qualitative research. Qual Inquiry. 2001;7(6):679–692.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology. 2022;9(1):3–26.
   Google Scholar
• Wyatt TR, Zaidi Z. Bricolage: a tool for race-related, historically situated complex research. Med Educ. 2022;56(2):170–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Sighem A, Wit F, Boyd A, et al. Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection in The Netherlands. Amsterdam: Stichting HIV Monitoring; 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Naderifar M, Goli H, Ghaljaie F. Snowball sampling: a purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2017;14(3):e67670.
   Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Agarwal H, Stockman JK, et al. “I would absolutely need to know that My partner is still going to be protected”: perceptions of HIV cure-related research among diverse HIV serodifferent couples in the United States. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2023;39(8):400–413.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell DM, Dubé K, Cowlings PD, et al. “It comes altogether as one”: perceptions of analytical treatment interruptions and partner protections among racial, ethnic, sex and gender diverse HIV serodifferent couples in the United States. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1317.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reza-Paul S, Lazarus L, Jana S, et al. Community inclusion in PrEP demonstration projects: lessons for scaling up. Gates Open Res. 2019;3:1504.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spieldenner A, French M, Ray V, et al. The meaningful involvement of people with HIV/AIDS (MIPA): the participatory praxis approach to community engagement on HIV surveillance. jces. 2022;14(2):1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Brown B, Sugarman J. Why ethics guidance needs to be updated for contemporary HIV prevention research. J Int AIDS Soc. 2020;23(5):e25500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slevin KW, Ukpong M, Heise L. Community engagement in HIV prevention trials: evolution of the field and opportunities for growth Microbicides Dev Programme aids 2031 Science and Technology Working Papers. 2008. Available at: http://www.path.org/publications/files/aids2031 (Last accessed November 7, 2023).
   Google Scholar
• Jefferys R. Scientific complexity and ethical uncertainties: the importance of community engagement in HIV cure research. Tagline. 2019;6(1):12–14.
   Google Scholar
• Miall A, McLellan R, Dong K, et al. Bringing social context into global biomedical HIV cure-related research: an urgent call to action. J Virus Erad. 2022;8(1):100062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abreu A, Frederix I, Dendale P, et al. Standardization and quality improvement of secondary prevention through cardiovascular rehabilitation programmes in Europe: the avenue towards EAPC accreditation programme: a position statement of the Secondary Prevention and Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC). Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2021;28:496–509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNAIDS, AVAC. Good participatory practice: Guidelines for biomedical HIV prevention trials. Second edition. Geneva, Switzerland; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Papautsky EL, Patterson ES. Patients are knowledge workers in the clinical information space. Appl Clin Inform. 2021;12(1):133–140.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bravo P, Edwards A, Barr PJ, et al. Conceptualising patient empowerment: a mixed methods study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):252.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stepanian N, Larsen MH, Mendelsohn JB, et al. Empowerment interventions designed for persons living with chronic disease - a systematic review and meta-analysis of the components and efficacy of format on patient-reported outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):911.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bain LE, Akondeng C, Njamnshi WY, et al. Community engagement in research in Sub-Saharan Africa: current practices, barriers, facilitators, ethical considerations and the role of gender - a systematic review. PAMJ. 2022;43:152.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson A, Slack C, Thabethe S, et al. “It’s almost as if stakeholder engagement is the annoying 'have-to-do’…”: can ethics review help address the "3 Ts" of tokenism, toxicity, and tailoring in stakeholder engagement? J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2022;17(3):292–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varma DS, Young ME, Kreider CM, et al. Practical considerations in qualitative health research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Qual Methods. 2021;20:16094069211043755.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar