Challenges of establishing a Community Advisory Board (CAB) in a low-income, low-resource setting: experiences from Bagamoyo, Tanzania

By Kafuruki Shubis, O. Juma, Rahiya Sharifu, Brandt R. Burgess, S. Abdulla. Health Research Policy and Systems, 2009

708 citations recorded by the source corpus.

ObjectiveCommunity Advisory Boards are now seen as standard practice for clinical vaccine and drug trials worldwide. In the past, most Community Advisory Boards (CABs) were established by activists and lobbyists to monitor HIV/AIDS vaccine and drug trials in developed countries. In Africa the first CAB was established in Uganda in 1990 in conjunction with an HIV vaccine project and has since been followed by others in South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Kenya. In 2007, the Bagamoyo branch of the Ifakara Health Institute initiated the formation of a CAB. The aim was to properly educate and empower elected CAB members to become full partners in all research activities concerning the public within the Bagamoyo area.Methods and ResultsBeginning in 2007, staff visited each of the 24 villages within the study area to inform the communities about the proposed CAB and asked them to elect two individuals to represent their village on the CAB. The first attempt was hampered by community leaders selecting themselves, which led to inconsistent attendance, gender imbalance, and political infighting. New criteria for the selection of representatives were implemented to exclude governmental leaders, illiterate representatives and to promote a one-to-one gender balance. The newly appointed representatives underwent training and have participated in CAB meetings largely devoid of the negative issues previously encountered.ConclusionThe successfully established CAB has led to improved relations with the community and facilitated the recruitment of study subjects. Our experiences show that, it is possible to establish a non-specific CAB in a low-income setting.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Health, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2910ab90d9726e946e82297c4f8dd200de6499f7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Health

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

John Hoddinott

Citations in the corpus

From Arksey and O’Malley and Beyond: Customizations to enhance a team-based, mixed approach to scoping review methodology (2021, background): “Findings synthesized from the scoping reviews on scoping reviews revealed critiques including wide variation in methodological rigor [1,14 , 15] ; inconsistencies in how findings are reported [7 , 14 , 15] ; lack”
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews (2016, methodology): “We conducted a comprehensive scoping review that included 4 development papers [1, 2, 10, 24] on scoping reviews and 494 scoping reviews.”
A scoping review of the development resilience literature: Theory, methods and evidence (2021, background): “It allows us to contextualize knowledge within the current landscape of policy and practice (Anderson et al., 2008) and identify gaps in research.”
What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. (2009, methodology): “Furthermore, we concur with the suggestions of Anderson et al. (2008) that by spelling out that purpose through descriptive statements such as ‘‘a scoping study K. Davis et al. / International Journal of Nursing Studies 46 (2009) 1386–1400 1397 designed to provide an initial indication of the size…”