Ethics and HIV prevention research: An analysis of the early tenofovir PrEP trial in Nigeria

6Citations
Citations of this article
57Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

In 2004, the first ever multi-sited clinical trials studied the prospect of HIV biomedical prevention (referred to as pre-exposure prophylaxis—‘PrEP’). The trials were implemented at several international sites, but many officially closed down before they completed. At most sites, both scientists and community AIDS advocates raised concerns over the ethics and scientific rationales of the trial. Focusing on the Nigerian trial site, we detail the controversy that emerged among mostly Nigerian research scientists who scrutinized the research design and protocol. While some of the disputes, especially those pertaining to community engagement mechanisms, were ultimately resolved in international fora and implemented in later PrEP trials, concerns over science rationales and assumptions were never addressed. We argue that scientific rationales should be treated as ethical concerns and suggest that such concerns should be deliberated at host sites before the trial protocol is finalized.

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Community Inclusion in PrEP Demonstration Projects: Lessons for Scaling Up

22Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

HIV prevention clinical trials’ community engagement guidelines: inequality, and ethical conflicts

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

HIV awareness, pre-exposure prophylaxis perceptions and experiences among people who exchange sex: qualitative and community based participatory study

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Peterson, K., & Folayan, M. O. (2019). Ethics and HIV prevention research: An analysis of the early tenofovir PrEP trial in Nigeria. Bioethics, 33(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12470

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘240481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 22

65%

Researcher 8

24%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

6%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 9

39%

Social Sciences 6

26%

Immunology and Microbiology 6

26%

Materials Science 2

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0