Publication: Recommendations from Thai stakeholders about protecting HIV remission (‘cure’) trial participants: Report from a participatory workshop
Issued Date
2020-11-01
Resource Type
ISSN
18763405
18763413
18763413
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85095979231
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
International Health. Vol.12, No.6 (2020), 567-574
Suggested Citation
Holly L. Peay, Nuchanart Q. Ormsby, Gail E. Henderson, Thidarat Jupimai, Stuart Rennie, Krittaecho Siripassorn, Kunakorn Kanchawee, Sinéad Isaacson, R. Jean Cadigan, Kriste Kuczynski, Udom Likhitwonnawut Recommendations from Thai stakeholders about protecting HIV remission (‘cure’) trial participants: Report from a participatory workshop. International Health. Vol.12, No.6 (2020), 567-574. doi:10.1093/inthealth/ihaa067 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/60576
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Recommendations from Thai stakeholders about protecting HIV remission (‘cure’) trial participants: Report from a participatory workshop
Abstract
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background: The social/behavioral HIV Decision-Making Study (DMS) assesses informed consent and trial experiences of individuals in HIV remission trials in Thailand. We convened a 1-d multi-stakeholder participatory workshop in Bangkok. We provide a meeting summary and reactions from DMS investigators. Methods: Workshop members viewed de-identified interview excerpts from DMS participants. They deliberated on the findings and made recommendations regarding informed choice for remission trials. Notes and recordings were used to create a summary report, which was reviewed by members and refined. Results: Workshop members’ recommendations included HIV education and psychosocial support to establish the basis for informed choice, key trial information to be provided in everyday language, supportive decision-making processes and psychosocial care during and after the trial. Concerns included participant willingness to restart antiretrovirals after trial-mandated treatment interruption, unintended influence of the research team on decision-making and seemingly altruistic motivations for trial participation that may signal attempts to atone for stigmatized behavior. Conclusions: The workshop highlighted community perspectives and resulted in recommendations for supporting informed choice and psychosocial and physical health. These are the first such recommendations arising from a deliberative process. Although some elements are rooted in the Thai context, most are applicable across remission trials.