18 research outputs found
Framing Male Circumcision to Promote its Adoption in Different Settings
The effectiveness of male circumcision in preventing transmission of HIV from females to males has been established. Those who are now advocating its widespread use face many challenges in convincing policy-makers and the public of circumcisionâs value. We suggest that frames are a useful lens for communicating public health messages that may help promote adoption of circumcision. Frames relate to how individuals and societies perceive and understand the world. Existing frames are often hard to shift, and should be borne in mind by advocates and program implementers as they attempt to promote male circumcision by invoking new frames. Frames differ across and within societies, and advocates must find ways of delivering resonant messages that take into account prior perceptions and use the most appropriate means of communicating the benefits and value of male circumcision to different audiences
Male Circumcision and HIV Prevention: Looking to the Future
Now that male circumcision has been shown to have a protective effect for men against HIV infection when engaging in vaginal intercourse with HIV-infected women, the research focus needs to shift towards the operational studies that can pave the way for effective implementation of circumcision programs. Behavioral research is needed to find out how people perceive the procedure and the barriers to and facilitators of uptake. It should also assess the risk of an increase in unsafe sex after circumcision. Social research must examine cultural perceptions of the practice, in Africa and beyond, including how likely uncircumcised communities are to access surgery and what messages are needed to persuade them. Advocates of male circumcision would benefit from research on how to influence health policy-makers, how best to communicate the benefits to the public, and how to design effective delivery models
Failing to learn the lessons: the U.S. response on global health security ignores 20 years of PEPFAR
Recent Developments in Latin American Politics
Harvey Kline, Professor Emeritus, University of Alabama, on Colombia
Jennie Lincoln, Carter Center, on Venezuela
Adriana Crocker, University of Illinois Springfield. on Argentine Mid-Terms
Greg Schmidt, University of Texas at El Paso, Update on Peru
Moderator: Richard Millett, Professor Emeritus, Southern Illinois University Edwardsvill
The Role of Community Advisory Boards: Involving Communities in the Informed Consent Process
Ethical research involving human subjects mandates that individual informed consent be obtained from research participants or from surrogates when participants are not able to consent for themselves.The existing requirements for informed consent assume that all study participants have personal autonomy; fully comprehend the purpose, risks, and benefits of the research; and volunteer for projects that disclose all relevant information. Yet contemporary examples of lapses in the individual informed consent process have been reported. The authors propose the use of community advisory boards, which can facilitate research by providing advice about the informed consent process and the design and implementation of research protocols. These activities could help reduce the number of individual informed consent lapses,benefiting study participants and the scientific integrity of the research in question
The uptake of population size estimation studies for key populations in guiding HIV responses on the African continent.
BACKGROUND:There has been a heightened emphasis on prioritizing data to inform evidence-based HIV responses, including data focused on both defining the content and scale of HIV programs in response to evidence-based need. Consequently, population size estimation (PSE) studies for key populations have become increasingly common to define the necessary scale of specific programs for key populations. This study aims to assess the research utilization of these size estimates in informing HIV policy and program documents across the African continent. METHODS:This study included two phases; Phase 1 was a review of all PSE for key populations, including men who have sex with men (MSM), female sex workers (FSW), people who use drugs (PWUD), and transgender persons in the 54 countries across Africa published from January 2009-December 2017. Phase 2 was a review of 23 different types of documents released between January 2009 -January 2019, with a focus on the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria investments, for evidence of stakeholder engagement in PSE studies, as well as key population PSE research utilization to inform HIV programming and international HIV investments. RESULTS:Of 118 size estimates identified in 39 studies, less than 15% were utilized in PEPFAR Country Operational Plans or national strategic health plan documents, and less than 2% in Global Fund Concept Notes. Of 39 PSE studies, over 50% engaged stakeholders in study implementation and identified target population stakeholders, a third of studies identified policy or program stakeholders, and 15% involved stakeholders in study design. CONCLUSION:The past decade has seen an increase in PSE studies conducted for key populations in more generalized HIV epidemic settings which involve significant investments of finances and human resources. However, there remains limited evidence of sustained uptake of these data to guide the HIV responses. Increasing uptake necessitates effective stakeholder engagement and data-oriented capacity building to optimize research utilization and facilitate data-driven and human rights-affirming HIV responses
Calculating indirect costs from international PEPFAR implementing partners.
BACKGROUND:UNAIDS estimates global HIV investment needs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) at 37.01 billion in total COP funding between 2007 and 2016, 17.95B) and universities (1.92B) and other expenses (16.44B remained in combined direct and indirect costs. From this, we estimate that between 4.34B (19.51%) has been spent on indirect costs from 2007-2016, including 369 million in 2016. INTERPRETATION:To our knowledge, this is the first analysis to quantify the indirect costs of major implementing partners of a global HIV funder. However, lack of transparency in the indirect cost rates of non-University international partners creates an opaque layer of programmatic costs. Given the current funding environment and evolution of HIV programming in PEPFAR countries, the findings motivate a re-examination of the current policies and the return on investment in indirect cost recovery across the PEPFAR program