Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Hello Bamidele my man,
I like your detailed contributions too. Thank you for the contributions. This is educative
Thank you
Isaac
Thank you Mahesh, i think that is a point too, Anthonia, i like the questionnaire arrangements although the design matters
Hello colleagues and GPP team,
Hope you are all doing good, in Zambia, Lusaka, we are freezing, its the coldest part of the year.
Coming to our discussion question, In my context, it might be some how different because we use the same CABs for different trials each site and we usually have a study running. For example now we have TB Vaccine study, PopART study, HIV self test study. So this means the even if another trial ends, there could be another trial still being implemented at the same site.
However, there are times in some sites where a trial ends and there are no activities. In this case we support the CAB and even community health workers we wok close with by involving them in other national health programs or events that may be beyond trials. Programs like world TB Day, World HIV/AIDS day and other related activities and then refund their transport and time for participating.
In health centres we also sponsor their meeting, provides them always needed materials like sputum bottles, swabs, needles and other materials we may share with them. We also help with lab requirements.
We would be be proud to say we have established a very good relationship with most of our stake holders such that they are free to request for from the organization when they run of some materials they need.We also help health centres by running test they may not be able to do due to lack of equipment.
In short we make sure we are in touch and always assure them that a different trials may come up sooner that expected and it would be important for them to be in good shape when we need them. we always keep their hopes alive
These are some activities i may not have remembered to mention help us to sustain our CAB and other we closely work with and to keep our relationship going even when we are not actively implementing any trial
The problem i have observed is that Researchers are always in a hurry for participant recruitment instead of investing enough time on Stakeholder Engagement. Attention is only given to stakeholder Engagement when there is a problem otherwise stakeholder Engagement is not regarded as an important factor.
I feel with the influence and impact am seeing with GPP, things may change
With what I have learned in this course, stakeholder engagement is very important in each trial. Stakeholders regardless of their education background or affiliation.
There was supposed to be enough information/sensitization about the study, human rights, confidentiality and policies regarding the possible participants.My observation is that in most trials, very little is done regarding stakeholder engagement until challenges arise then people would realize that there were gaps at trial design and even at implementation stage.
It would be important to be pro-active. It is important to consider every stakeholder at the trial design to avoid surprises or unexpected happenings.
However, when this happened, the research team should have met and look at their issue management plan and problem solving mechanisms in place and possibly call for a meeting with the CAB and the rest of stakeholders including night club owners and mostly targeted groups and present the challenges.
After these meetings with stakeholders, sensitization should have been enhanced to make sure myths or misconception are cleared.
Assurance of security to participants should be emphasized to make sure the recruited participants do not live in fear or decide to leave the study due to fears.Due to lack of inclusion of clean needles in the prevention package on trial, results will not be accepted and this is because some procedures that qualify acceptable results were not followed.
I feel that in most trials , stakeholder engagement is not given a priority until a problem arise then we usually realize and go back to find out what was not done accordingly and in most cases is lack of GPP implementation.With what i have learned with the GPP team, it is very clear that the base stakeholder engagement is very important to create a safe fall back and back up if anything changes or goes wrong in the process of study implementation.
This help the community in return to trust researchers and their teams for even future studies. However, in this case the trust was lost on both results and trial itself and eventually it might be difficult to come back with any trial in the same environment/community.
GPP/stakeholder engagement should be given a place in any trial from the design of a study up to long after a study is implemented
Hello Anne, GPP team and my fellow learners,
At my site social media and online communication has really effectevely affected engagement strategies with stakeholders positively. It is cheaper and faster and also reaches multitudes of people in a single click.
However, to avoid misperceptions and all, our social media and online communication with with our stakeholders is done in in a strategies, systematic phases. That is when all aprovals have been obtained, then internal stakeholders are informed, then all stakeholders In groups and level and informed including media houses. This is done to avoid any unnecessary questions that may come up on the media and stakeholders like CAB/CAG may not have information to defenddefend the trial/study.
At this stage, the Zambart communication department, research team and others stage holders design messages to be shared on media and stakeholders are informed prior to the post or share of such information.
Usually training is done for media houses before information about the study in spread to avoid misrepresentation of a trial.
I feel social media and online communication is the cheaper, faster and most effective way to communicate is well handled but the most harmfull if not well handled.
Jessica – That is very true. That is why in my case i try and make sure my CAB membership is up to date with full community representation, e.g police, area councilor(politically), traditional healers, women association, Muslim society, churches, schools, study site health facility and others. this helps not to have gaps in the process of study implementation.
Bernice – You almost do what we do at my site in-terms of stakeholder identification/selection, i like your explanation.
Assessment is done at the beginning of a trial and that is looking at the agenda of a trial. The agenda of a trial will help you on how to select and appropriate stakeholder at each stage or phase of a trial. The assessment is done through various ways, such as mapping, focus groups, interviews and conversations with key informants and of course, consultations with the CAB. At each phase of a study there are always stakeholder who will be more important than others depending on the agenda of a trial, objectives and goals.
After stakeholder selection is done, in my case we usually have meetings separately to avoid confusion or misunderstanding among different classes of categories of stakeholders. The groups may be categorized as follows for example, health centre staff for the trial site, Community Advisory Bord (CAB), Traditional healers and other categories.
The aim of the meeting is to introduce the study to all the identified stakeholders first and then then come down to who will be directly involved through out the implementation of the study.It is obvious that depending on a phase and agenda of the study, other stakeholders may be more relevant than the other. This also means that their involvement may differ from one stakeholder to another depending on their knowledge, influence, and regard in the Community and also their willingness to take part in the trial.
Thank you
May be this can be differ from site to site but for my site although we have built a good relationship with our study communities and various stakeholders i still feel it would be a surprise to our stakeholders not to involve them at formative research.
I strongly feel that it is extremely important to involve stakeholders no matter how much you are known in the community. You may not involve all stakeholders but select some who may be vital at this stage.
I feel it is wrong to exclude stakeholders just because you feel that you are now known in the community, and you have known the community as this may make stakeholders to react or you may miss important issues and make your work difficult.
It is very important to involve stakeholders at any stage of the study for mutual understanding and easy follow on trial issues.
Thank you
Isaac
We have always involved stakeholders in our formative research however, we select which stakeholders to involve at this stage. We have usually worked with the Community Advisory Board (CAB), Neighborhood Heath Committee (NHC) and Health Facility Staff if in that setting. I personally feel it is very important to involve stakeholders at this stage so as to have a smooth flow during implementation. It helps the stakeholders and the research team to have mutual understanding.
You do not need all stakeholders at this stage but select those you think can be instrumental at this stage and keep on building on the same until the implementation stage.
Thank you
