Promoting research integrity in Africa: an African voice of concern on research misconduct and the way forward.

African researchers and their collaborators have been making significant contributions to useful research findings and discoveries in Africa. Despite evidence of scientific misconduct even in heavily regulated research environments, there is little documented information that supports prevalence of research misconduct in Africa. Available literature on research misconduct has focused on the developed world, where credible research integrity systems are already in place. Public attention to research misconduct has lately increased, calling for attention to weaknesses in current research policies and regulatory frameworks. Africa needs policies, structural and governance systems that promote responsible conduct of research. To begin to offset this relative lack of documented evidence of research misconduct, contributors working in various research institutions from nine African countries agreed to share their experiences to highlight problems and explore the need to identify strategies to promote research integrity in the African continent. The experiences shared include anecdotal but reliable accounts of previously undocumented research misconduct, including some 'normal misbehavior' of frontline staff in those countries. Two broad approaches to foster greater research integrity are proposed including promotion of institutional and individual capacity building to instil a culture of responsible research conduct in existing and upcoming research scientist and developing deterrent and corrective policies to minimize research misconduct and other questionable research practices. By sharing these experiences and through the strategies proposed, the authors hope to limit the level of research misconduct and promote research integrity in Africa.

Promoting continuous use as a strategy for achieving adherence in a trial of the diaphragm with candidate microbicide.

Women need more choices for protection from HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). We conducted a randomized 4-week study in Madagascar in preparation for a Phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the diaphragm with a candidate microbicide for STI prevention. All participants completed quantitative surveys; half participated in a qualitative interview. We advised women to wear the diaphragm at all times except for daily cleaning (rather than inserting it before intercourse). The objective of this analysis was to determine whether women who followed this "continuous use" approach more often used the diaphragm for 100% of sex acts as compared with other women. If so, this would support advising continuous diaphragm use in the upcoming RCT. To meet our objective, we analyzed qualitative data thematically, developed a measure of continuous diaphragm use based on qualitative data, and used multiple regression to evaluate the measure's association with adherence to diaphragm use during 100% of sex acts. Women who wore the diaphragm continuously had 4 times higher odds of reporting diaphragm use during 100% of sex acts (OR: 4.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 24.0). If the diaphragm proves effective against STI, continuous use may help women achieve high levels of protection.

Predictors of adherent use of diaphragms and microbicide gel in a four-arm, randomized pilot study among female sex workers in Madagascar.

BACKGROUND: Participants' protocol adherence may influence assessments of the effectiveness of new female-controlled methods for sexually transmitted infection prevention. METHODS: In 2005 we conducted a randomized pilot study among female sex workers (FSWs) in Madagascar in preparation for sexually transmitted infection prevention trial of diaphragms and a vaginal microbicide. Participants (n = 192) were randomized into 4 arms: diaphragm plus microbicide (Acidform), diaphragm plus placebo gel hydroxyethyl cellulose (HEC), Acidform alone, or HEC alone. FSWs were seen weekly for 4 weeks. Using multivariable regression with generalized estimating equations, we assessed predictors of adherent product use during all sex acts in the last week. We collapsed the gel-diaphragm arms together and the gel-only arms together for this analysis. RESULTS: Between 43% and 67% of gel-diaphragm users (varying by visit) reported using study products during all sex acts in the last week, compared with 20% to 45% of gel-only users. Adherence increased with follow-up [visit 4 vs. visit 1 risk ratio (RR) for gel-diaphragm users: 1.55, P <0.01; for gel-only users, RR: 1.58, P = 0.01]. Gel-diaphragm users whose casual partners were never aware of products (RR: 2.02, P = 0.03) and who had experienced partner violence after requesting condom use (RR: 1.45, P <0.01) were more adherent. Gel-only users reporting lower sexual frequency (1-9 weekly acts vs. >or=19 acts, RR: 1.98, P <0.01) and no sex with primary partners in the past week (RR: 1.54, P = 0.02) were more adherent. CONCLUSIONS: Gel-diaphragm users had better adherence than gel-only users, and predictors of adherence differed between groups. Addressing modifiable factors during counseling sessions may improve adherence.