Search

We examined depression and anxiety prior to and during COVID-19 restrictions in Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM). In an online cohort, a COVID-19-focused survey was conducted in April 2020. During 2019 and in April 2020, 664 GBM completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9, measuring depression) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7, measuring anxiety). Increased depression and anxiety were defined as a ≥ 5 point increase on the respective scales. Mean PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores increased between 2019 and 2020 (PHQ-9: from 5.11 in 2019 to 6.55 in 2020; GAD-7: from 3.80 in 2019 to 4.95 in 2020). The proportion of participants with moderate-severe depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) increased from 18.8% (n = 125) to 25.5% (n = 169), while the proportion of participants with moderate-severe anxiety (GAD-7 ≥ 10) increased from 12.7% (n = 84) to 17.3% (n = 115). Almost one-quarter of participants (n = 158, 23.8%) had increased depression; in these men, mean PHQ-9 increased from 2.49 in 2019 to 11.65 in 2020 (p n = 137) had increased anxiety; among these men, mean GAD-7 increased from 2.05 in 2019 to 10.22 in 2020 (p

We mapped gay and bisexual men’s (GBM) patterns of using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) over time and explored sexual behavior as PrEP use changed. We conducted semi-structured interviews between June 2020 and February 2021 with 40 GBM living in Australia who had changed their PrEP use since initiating. There was considerable diversity in patterns of discontinuation, suspension, and recommencement of PrEP. Reasons for changing PrEP use mostly centered on accurate perceived changes to HIV risk. Twelve participants reported condomless anal intercourse with casual or fuckbuddy partners after discontinuing PrEP. These sex events were unanticipated, condoms were not a preferred option, and other risk reduction strategies were applied inconsistently. Service delivery and health promotion can support safer sex among GBM when PrEP use fluctuates by promoting event-driven PrEP and/or non-condom-based risk reduction methods during periods off daily PrEP, and guiding GBM to better recognize changing circumstances of risk and when to recommence PrEP.

We report on Australian gay and bisexual men's (GBM) perceptions of preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Drawing on an online longitudinal cohort study, 1,404 free-text responses from HIV-negative or untested Australian GBM were qualitatively analysed. The chi-square statistic was then used to assess differences regarding PrEP-perceptions by participants' demographic and behavioral characteristics. Positive views of PrEP were twice more common than negative. Those with positive views thought PrEP helped overcome HIV fear and anxiety, enhanced sexual pleasure, and was a 'socially responsible' course of action. Those with negative views believed that people without medical conditions did not need medication and expressed concern that PrEP was replacing condoms, representing 'dangerous' behavior. Descriptive statistics revealed differences in PrEP-perceptions relating to age, recency of HIV testing, and PrEP eligibility. This study is the first to use free-text data to examine the frequency of Australian GBM's PrEP-perceptions, highlighting the potential benefits and challenges to its promotion.

Strategies for HIV prevention among infants, children, and adolescents have evolved significantly over the past 20 years. These include the global scale-up of simplified multidrug HIV regimens for pregnant women, leading to impressive reductions in new child HIV infections. However, significant gaps remain, especially in high HIV-burden sub-Saharan African countries. For example, many pregnant women living with HIV (WLHIV) are unable to access and sustain HIV testing and treatment partly due to low agency and harmful gender norms. Among pregnant WLHIV, adolescent girls face an additional layer of societal and health-system barriers in accessing care for themselves and their exposed infants. Legal and structural barriers limit access to HIV prevention-related sexual and reproductive health services among high-risk adolescents, including girls and young men who have sex with men. Key ethical issues underlying HIV prevention gaps for infants, children, and adolescents prevail. This narrative review explores these issues and highlights counter-measures for programming and policy, including gender empowerment, improving access to and appropriateness of critical health services, rights-based policy and legislation, closing research gaps, and considering the values and preferences of young people for HIV prevention and treatment services.

Visual research methods like photography and digital storytelling are increasingly used in health and social sciences research as participatory approaches that benefit participants, researchers, and audiences. Visual methods involve a number of additional ethical considerations such as using identifiable content and ownership of creative outputs. As such, ethics committees should use different assessment frameworks to consider research protocols with visual methods. Here, we outline the limitations of ethics committees in assessing projects with a visual focus and highlight the sparse knowledge on how researchers respond when they encounter ethical challenges in the practice of visual research. We propose a situated approach in relation to visual methodologies that encompasses a negotiated, flexible approach, given that ethical issues usually emerge in relation to the specific contexts of individual research projects. Drawing on available literature and two case studies, we identify and reflect on nuanced ethical implications in visual research, like tensions between aesthetics and research validity. The case studies highlight strategies developed in-situ to address the challenges two researchers encountered when using visual research methods, illustrating that some practice implications are not necessarily addressed using established ethical clearance procedures. A situated approach can ensure that visual research remains ethical, engaging, and rigorous.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained an error. The authors would like to correct the error with this erratum.

In July 2012, based on evidence from two major trials, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved the use of combined oral tenofovir/emtricitabine as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for people at high risk of HIV acquisition. PrEP effectiveness is marred by poor adherence, however, even in trial populations, thus it is not a magic bullet for HIV prevention. It is, however, the most effective biomedical HIV prevention intervention available for people at high risk of HIV, particularly those who have receptive sex and lack the power to negotiate condom use. Accordingly, there are compelling reasons to compare future experimental HIV prevention interventions against PrEP. The interests both of trial participants and of science are served by using PrEP as comparator: Not only would HIV incidence be reduced, but also the question of whether new interventions were superior to best proven interventions, in a given setting, would be answered comprehensively.

Background The global interest in developing therapies for Ebola infection management and its prevention is laudable. However the plan to conduct an emergency immunization program specifically for healthcare workers using experimental vaccines raises some ethical concerns. This paper shares perspectives on these concerns and suggests how some of them may best be addressed. Discussion The recruitment of healthcare workers for Ebola vaccine research has challenges. It could result in coercion of initially dissenting healthcare workers to assist in the management of EVD infected persons due to mistaken beliefs that the vaccine offers protection. It could also affect equity and justice. For example, where people who are not skilled health care professionals but who provide care to patients infected with Ebola (such as in home care settings) are not prioritized for vaccination. The possibility of study participants contracting Ebola infection despite the use of experimental vaccine, and the standard of care they would receive, needs to be addressed clearly, transparently and formalized as part of the ethics review process. Future access to study products in view of current status of the TRIPS agreement needs to be addressed. Finally, broad stakeholder engagement at local, regional and international levels needs to be promoted using available communication channels to engage local, regional and international support. These same concerns are applicable for current and future epidemics. Summary Successful Ebola vaccine development research requires concerted efforts at public dialogue to address misconceptions, equity and justice in participant selection, and honest discussions about risks, benefits and future access. Public dialogue about Ebola vaccine research plans is crucial and should be conducted by trusted locals and negotiated between communities, researchers and ethics committees in research study sites.

Background The current Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa is the largest in history. As of February 18th 2015, 23,258 cases of EVD have been cumulatively reported from Nigeria, Senegal, Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States of America resulting in more than 9,000 deaths. It is therefore exigent to develop prevention and treatment therapies for EVD. Discussion Several new EVD treatments are in clinical development at this time. Based on lessons learned, four critical processes need to be implemented before clinical trials begin. First, all global EVD research need to be coordinated to promote data sharing and synergistic overlap, while reducing unnecessary duplication of efforts. The World Health Organization is well-placed to undertake such an endeavor. Second, governments of affected nations where trials are being proposed need to lead discussions regarding immediate access to any proven medications for epidemics. Also, governments need to leverage international resources to support and expand existing national expertise to jointly conduct high-caliber clinical research; and resources must be used to enhance local technical skills and expand existing personnel. Third, ethics committees must review protocols, monitor the research process, and work closely with research scientists to insure the ethical integrity of research throughout the trials. Fourth, community advisory boards (CAB) need to be formed, linked with existing community leadership structures and organized in conjunction with trial implementation. These community structures should work together with ethics committees to facilitate the study design, informed consent process, and study implementation. Summary We must facilitate communication and mutual understanding between trial communities and research teams, and promote positive collaborations between all stakeholders engaged in EVD research. The community engagement process for EVD research is crucial to address myths and misconceptions, and to promote study volunteers’ understanding of the research details. The collaboration between all stakeholders is crucial for continued long term partnership to address EVD outbreak and none of the stakeholders should be left behind in ongoing efforts to develop EVD therapies.