TY - JOUR
T1 - Integrating public health programs and research after the malaria vaccine implementation program (MVIP)
T2 - Recommendations for next steps
AU - van der Graaf, Rieke
AU - Macklin, Ruth
AU - Rid, Annette
AU - Bhan, Anant
AU - Gefenas, Eugenijus
AU - Greco, Dirceu
AU - Haerry, David
AU - Hurst, Samia
AU - London, Alex John
AU - Saracci, Rodolfo
AU - Sprumont, Dominique
AU - van Delden, Johannes J.M.
N1 - Published by Elsevier Ltd.
PY - 2020/10/21
Y1 - 2020/10/21
N2 - Background: In February 2020, international controversy arose about the ethical acceptability of the WHO Malaria Vaccine Implementation Program (MVIP). Whereas some have argued that this program must be seen as research that is not in line with international ethical standards, notably regarding informed consent and local ethical review, some WHO representatives consider the MVIP as a public health implementation program that need not adhere to these standards. Methods: We performed a case analysis in light of the 2016 CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research involving Humans. Findings: We argue that the MVIP has a substantial research component, and that it is prudent to therefore apply ethical norms for research involving humans, such as the CIOMS guidelines. Accordingly, we agree that the ethical requirements of informed consent and independent ethical review have not been met. In addition, we are concerned that the study might not meet CIOMS's social value requirement. Recommendations: We urge WHO to release more details about the process that led to the MVIP program and make the MVIP protocol publicly available. The full protocol should be assessed by the relevant ethics committees, new and already enrolled parents should be informed about the uncertainties under investigation and given a real opportunity to consent or refuse (continued) participation, communities should be engaged, and aspects of MVIP that require alteration in light of ethical review should be altered, if possible. Furthermore, in order to improve good ethical practices, it is necessary to engage in international debate regarding the integration of research and public health programs. Procedurally, vaccine implementation programs that combine both prevention and research should involve the wider international ethics community and ensure participation of the target populations in setting the proper conditions for launching such programs.
AB - Background: In February 2020, international controversy arose about the ethical acceptability of the WHO Malaria Vaccine Implementation Program (MVIP). Whereas some have argued that this program must be seen as research that is not in line with international ethical standards, notably regarding informed consent and local ethical review, some WHO representatives consider the MVIP as a public health implementation program that need not adhere to these standards. Methods: We performed a case analysis in light of the 2016 CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research involving Humans. Findings: We argue that the MVIP has a substantial research component, and that it is prudent to therefore apply ethical norms for research involving humans, such as the CIOMS guidelines. Accordingly, we agree that the ethical requirements of informed consent and independent ethical review have not been met. In addition, we are concerned that the study might not meet CIOMS's social value requirement. Recommendations: We urge WHO to release more details about the process that led to the MVIP program and make the MVIP protocol publicly available. The full protocol should be assessed by the relevant ethics committees, new and already enrolled parents should be informed about the uncertainties under investigation and given a real opportunity to consent or refuse (continued) participation, communities should be engaged, and aspects of MVIP that require alteration in light of ethical review should be altered, if possible. Furthermore, in order to improve good ethical practices, it is necessary to engage in international debate regarding the integration of research and public health programs. Procedurally, vaccine implementation programs that combine both prevention and research should involve the wider international ethics community and ensure participation of the target populations in setting the proper conditions for launching such programs.
KW - Research ethics
KW - Malaria vaccines
KW - CIOMS guidelines
KW - Cluster-randomized trials
KW - WHO
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091712241&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.08.077
DO - 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.08.077
M3 - Editorial
C2 - 32981780
AN - SCOPUS:85091712241
SN - 0264-410X
VL - 38
SP - 6975
EP - 6978
JO - Vaccine
JF - Vaccine
IS - 45
ER -