Evidence Hub

Passing the Baton: Community-based ethnography to design a randomized clinical trial on the effectiveness of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention among Black men who have sex with men

Jonathan Garcia, P. Colson, C. Parker, J. Hirsch

Contemporary Clinical Trials, 2015

21 citations

Abstract

Although HIV interventions and clinical trials increasingly report the use of mixed methods, studies have not reported on the process through which ethnographic or qualitative findings are incorporated into RCT designs. We conducted a community-based ethnography on social and structural factors that may affect the acceptance of and adherence to oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among Black men who have sex with men (BMSM). We then devised the treatment arm of an adherence clinical trial drawing on findings from the community-based ethnography. This article describes how ethnographic findings informed the RCT and identifies distilled themes and findings that could be included as part of an RCT. The enhanced intervention includes in-person support groups, online support groups, peer navigation, and text message reminders. By describing key process-related facilitators and barriers to conducting meaningful mixed methods research, we provide important insights for the practice of designing clinical trials for ‘real-world’ community settings.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free