ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
Balancing solidarity, normality and trust: reasons for (non-)participation in an injectable HIV antiretroviral therapy study in the United Kingdom.
Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many new drug trials fail to recruit participants that are representative of the populations they are intended to serve, resulting in research gaps which contribute to health inequalities. In the United Kingdom, reasons for non-participation in HIV drug trials remain poorly understood. Accordingly, we present a thematic analysis of interview and survey data gathering the perspectives of individuals who chose to participate and those who chose not to participate in the ILANA study – an implementation study of the first ever long-acting injectable HIV treatment, cabotegravir and rilpivirine. Drawing on the theoretical concepts of ‘biosociality’ and ‘therapeutic citizenship’, we identified three main thematic areas in participants’ narratives: solidarity with other people living with HIV; the pursuit of normality; and patient-clinician trust. We argue that our analysis offers insights into how decision-making across a diverse group of research participants can be motivated by similar factors but lead to different outcomes. This has implications both for how (non-)participation is understood by researchers, and how attentions may best be focused among those seeking to address inequity in research participation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.