Community peer review is a method that extends the ethics of consent into scientific practices. It gives communities affected by scientific research the ability to determine whether research may cause them harm and be part of determining how knowledge should best circulate to reduce or eliminate that harm. This paper introduces the method of community peer review by first looking at the concepts of consent and refusal, then outlining the steps to community peer review, using a case study of community meetings on a study of plastic ingestion by fish to elucidate the details of each step. Steps include: hiring a community member to the team; researching the social, cultural, and economic contexts of the community; identify the community; ensure skills for community conversation are in place; call the community meeting; conduct the community meeting; and analyze feedback for consent and refusal. Community peer review is premised on the idea that research is not inherently good and can cause harm, and that the best people to know whether and what kinds of harms are likely to occur are community members rather than researchers. The second premise is that the researcher’s “right” to research never supersedes a community’s right to not be harmed.

Men are perceived as significant barriers to the uptake of contraception in some communities, and lack of spousal communication regarding contraception is evident in some studies conducted in South-West and Northern Nigeria. The objective is to identify and discuss how husband consent to family planning (FP) and spousal communication influence family planning use among peri-urban dwellers in Nigeria. The study was limited to the primary dataset collected among young mothers that resides in peri-urban between the age of 15-30 years in South West, Nigeria. The result showed that the use of family planning was high among the respondents whose husband give consent to the use of family planning, and respondents who had appropriate spousal communication. Similarly, respondents whose spouse asks questions or whose husband advises on communication are likely to use FP. On the other hand, respondents whose husband didn’t give consent, respondents with inappropriate communication with the spouse, respondents whose spouses didn’t give advice, and those whose spouses didn’t ask questions are less likely to use FP.

Aim: The overall aim of the study was to assess the reasons and experiences of participants involved in Antibody Mediated Prevention (AMP) HIV prevention clinical trial at University of North Carolina (UNC) Project, Lilongwe, Malawi. We determined the participants’ reasons for participating in HIV Prevention clinical trials; and the experiences of participants in HIV Prevention clinical trials. Methods: We adopted the qualitative cross-sectional study method. Data were collected using in-depth interviews (IDIs). Purposive sampling was used to select 12 study participants who consented to take part in the study. All participants were the ones taking part in the AMP HIV prevention study at the UNC Project. Data analysis was done concurrently with data collection using content analysis. Results: Individuals were motivated to participate in HIV research due to a range of perceived benefits. These included personal, health, and financial benefits. Participants' research experiences and their continued participation in HIV research were influenced by the research clinic context and the nature of their interactions with research staff. Conclusion: When the clinical trial study participants’ expectations are met through what they experience in the study, the chances of them adhering to the study visits and procedures are high. Even for those who did not have any expectations prior to the study, feeling welcomed and being able to open up to the study staff encouraged their continued participation. In the end, this outweighed the negative comments made by the people in their communities or their friends

Public trust in science was tested and relied on during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, which has shaped global events since the WHO declaration in March 11, 2020. Public trust has been impacted through the government recommendations and mandates informed by public health guidance, including non-pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical interventions. The free-flow of ideas and in-formation so essential to the functioning of science has faced unprecedented challenge from widespread censorship in both the media and in scientific journals. This has created a poisoned environment for the building of trust between science and society. Scientific norms and ac-countability must be restored in order to rebuild the vital relationship between scientists and the public they serve.

Child and adolescent sexual abuse (CSA) is an international public health problem. Despite the importance of the CSA, there is no consensus definition, and the lack of consensus is related to difficulties in conducting prevalence studies, as well as research in other areas. To establish a consensual definition, legal aspects such as the age of sexual consent and the difference in age or power between victim and aggressor, aspects related to sexual freedom and sexual indemnity must be considered. Therefore, the main goal of this research was to analyze the age of sexual consent in the legal systems of Spanish-speaking countries and to examine whether the Romeo and Juliet clause is established. To achieve the proposed aims, we employed the legal interpretation method, and we analyzed the current Criminal Codes of the 21 Spanish-speaking countries. From the results, it is found that the age of sexual consent varies between countries, establishing valid sexual consent between 13 and 18 years. In addition, only six countries have the Romeo and Juliet clause that protects sexual freedom in adolescents. Finally, we discussed the lack of consensus on the age of sexual consent and the limitations presented by the Romeo and Juliet clause.