Power-Laden (Mis)Understandings Surrounding Written Voluntary Informed Consent Procedures in Postcolonial Southern Africa

Written voluntary informed consent (VIC) procedures are the standard approach for operationalising the ethical principle of respect for persons’ autonomy in qualitative research. However, achieving fully informed and truly voluntary consent is challenging, particularly in qualitative research and/or postcolonial contexts. Evidence about (mis)understandings (i.e., unintended meanings) surrounding VIC comes primarily from participants in quantitative, biomedical research. I aim to advance knowledge about qualitative research participants’ (mis)understandings of VIC. I used ethnographic methods to document the evolving (mis)understandings participants attached to written VIC procedures in two postcolonial settings, Eswatini and South Africa. All participants provided me consent to document their interactions as co-researchers in participatory research, in which they learned about, designed and implemented VIC procedures. I analysed the data interpretively and abductively, informed by Bourdieu’s theory of practice. Participants valued the opportunity to decide and sign consent to participate but held (mis)understandings of study information and signing, which evolved as they participated. Many (mis)understandings were shaped by what the unfamiliar act of signing symbolised to them (i.e., binding, contractual agreements that protected the researcher/university and through which they relinquished their rights), from their positions of marginalisation amidst economic/material, cultural and social power inequalities. In postcolonial settings, requiring qualitative research participants to sign consent forms likely undermines the ethical principle of respect that VIC is intended to operationalise. Based on these findings I recommend alternative non-written procedures are used to operationalise the principle of respect in postcolonial qualitative research settings

Loving the mess: navigating diversity and conflict in social values for sustainability

This paper concludes a special feature of Sustainability Science that explores a broad range of social value theoretical traditions, such as religious studies, social psychology, indigenous knowledge, economics, sociology, and philosophy. We introduce a novel transdisciplinary conceptual framework that revolves around concepts of ‘lenses’ and ‘tensions’ to help navigate value diversity. First, we consider the notion of lenses: perspectives on value and valuation along diverse dimensions that describe what values focus on, how their sociality is envisioned, and what epistemic and procedural assumptions are made. We characterise fourteen of such dimensions. This provides a foundation for exploration of seven areas of tension, between: (1) the values of individuals vs collectives; (2) values as discrete and held vs embedded and constructed; (3) value as static or changeable; (4) valuation as descriptive vs normative and transformative; (5) social vs relational values; (6) different rationalities and their relation to value integration; (7) degrees of acknowledgment of the role of power in navigating value conflicts. In doing so, we embrace the ‘mess’ of diversity, yet also provide a framework to organise this mess and support and encourage active transdisciplinary collaboration. We identify key research areas where such collaborations can be harnessed for sustainability transformation. Here it is crucial to understand how certain social value lenses are privileged over others and build capacity in decision-making for understanding and drawing on multiple value, epistemic and procedural lenses.Peer reviewe

Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

Introduction: The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures. Methods: In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025. Findings: Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation. Interpretation: After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Enhancing demographic survey protocols to characterise household dynamics that influence health – a participatory approach from rural Eswatini

Standard Western demographic survey protocols fail to capture dynamics, such as circular migration and support networks, that profoundly influence the health of non-Western domestic social groups, typically called households. Enhanced protocols are needed because survey data provide the primary evidence base for health policy and planning globally. We present the participatory development, implementation and analysis of a novel demographic survey protocol, that aimed to better capture domestic social dynamics in rural Eswatini, southern Africa. The multiple-method study incorporated participatory health research about a community affected by HIV/AIDS, of which the survey formed part, and an ethnography of the participatory survey development process. Analysis of the data revealed limitations in the reliability and validity of standardised survey questions for measuring household membership, in contexts where circular migration and polygamy are common. Standard survey protocols potentiate double-counting members and misclassifying ‘child-headed’ and ‘female-headed’ households. They neglect social and economic dynamics that are known to influence health. Our novel demographic survey protocol provides a simple alternative method for capturing core data about circular migration and its impact on health. The study illustrates the contributions participatory and ethnographic research can make to enhancing demographic surveys

Ethical tensions surrounding ‘third-party disclosure’ by participants: Lessons from participatory health research in Eswatini

Third-party disclosure by participants is inherent to much global health research. It presents ethical tensions with respecting the autonomy and privacy of non-consenting individuals whose data are disclosed but is neglected in ethics guidelines. Our aim was to describe and ethically reflect on, third party disclosure in a community-participatory demographic and health survey (DHS) implemented within participatory health research (PHR) about community-based care of children affected by AIDS in Eswatini. We collected DHS data and analysed it statistically. We studied the PHR process and outcomes ethnographically and analysed the data interpretively, using theories that conceptualise secrecy as relational and power-laden. We found that third parties’ data were disclosed by DHS respondents (typically women), including data about health conditions, abuse perpetration and being a caregiving burden. Ethnographic findings suggested that some third parties may not have consented to us collecting their data. However, respecting third parties’ autonomy and privacy presents ethical tensions related to silencing survey respondents and impairing knowledge creation. To minimise the ethical tensions surrounding third-party disclosure researchers can analyse risks, benefits and power dynamics and extend their ethical responsibilities to protect participants to also protect non-participants, and from data collection to also include reporting

Digital_supplementary_file_2_Data_Frequency_Tables_submitted – Supplemental material for Health Capability Deprivations in a Rural Swazi Community: Understanding Complexity With Theoretically Informed, Qualitatively Driven, Mixed-Method Design, Participatory Action Research

<p>Supplemental material, Digital_supplementary_file_2_Data_Frequency_Tables_submitted for Health Capability Deprivations in a Rural Swazi Community: Understanding Complexity With Theoretically Informed, Qualitatively Driven, Mixed-Method Design, Participatory Action Research by Michelle R. Brear, Pinky N. Shabangu, Jane R. Fisher, Karin Hammarberg, Helen M. Keleher and Charles Livingstone in Qualitative Health Research</p

Digital_supplementary_file_1_Overview_of_workshop_topics_v2 – Supplemental material for Health Capability Deprivations in a Rural Swazi Community: Understanding Complexity With Theoretically Informed, Qualitatively Driven, Mixed-Method Design, Participatory Action Research

<p>Supplemental material, Digital_supplementary_file_1_Overview_of_workshop_topics_v2 for Health Capability Deprivations in a Rural Swazi Community: Understanding Complexity With Theoretically Informed, Qualitatively Driven, Mixed-Method Design, Participatory Action Research by Michelle R. Brear, Pinky N. Shabangu, Jane R. Fisher, Karin Hammarberg, Helen M. Keleher and Charles Livingstone in Qualitative Health Research</p