By Morenike Oluwatoyin Folayan and Elhadji Mbaye

While the training meetings for the Ethics Committees members in West Africa on Emerging and Re-emerging infectious diseases epidemics which held in Senegal between the September 23 and 27, 2017, may have come and gone, many of the outcomes of the discussions leave resounding echoes.

And some of these echoes were reiterated during the 2017 annual Bioethics Forum which held in Abuja between December 13 and 14, 2017.

One of these was the need for clinical trials – off-shored and on-shored research – to prioritise community engagement from the concept development stage of the trial, to the implementation stage, and then the result dissemination stage.

Institutional review boards also have to look out for evidence of community engagement exercises that had taken place before protocol finalization to ensure their inputs are taken into considerations in the design of the study protocol.

Of course, this also raises a number of issues.

First, researchers often report that they are challenged with identifying what are the boundaries for the community they need to engage with for any research studies.

They are also challenged to think about what it means to engage communities with the conceptualization of a research especially when they have to deal with a community that has low research literacy.

How, for instance, can barely literate people make meaningful inputs into research designs?

Second, Institutional review boards in many countries in West Africa are just growing their competencies on how to review research protocols and will need to have access to continuous capacity-building opportunities that will enable them objectively evaluate protocols in an ever evolving field of bioethics.

They also need to learn about what to look out for in protocols on community engagement.

But this point must be made.

Community engagement in research – including clinical trials – is not new. Community-based participatory research has been promoted for decades in countries around the world with a lot of strong research practice influence in Canada.

The Microbicide Trials Network funded by the National Institute of Health, has evolved a system of engaging communities while they conceptualise their research.

In 2007, UNAIDS and AVAC also developed a set of guidelines that can promote conceptualizing what community engagement is for HIV prevention research. The guidelines were revised in 2011 and have since been adapted for use for tuberculosis-related research and by WHO for research during emergencies.

While the proposition by the 24 participants who constituted themselves to the Network for ethics committees operating in West Africa sound great and feasible, it is important to emphasise that the competency of all stakeholders – researchers, sponsors and ethics committee members, would be needed to make this a reality.

Clarity is also needed on how this needs to be implemented. Researchers and ethics committee members need continuous training on how to implement this requirement.

AVAC recently launched a course to train interested investigators on how to develop research protocols that adhere to the good participatory practice principles that promote community engagement in research. There may also be the need to develop such a course for institutional review board members.

Morenike Oluwatoyin Folayan, New HIV Vaccine and Microbicide Advocacy Society

Elhadji Mbaye, IRESSEF, Senegal