The MDP 301 microbicide trial site in Masaka registered many successes in community engagement at the Masaka site: the trial worked with a broad range of stakeholders; took advantage of opportunities presented by stakeholder forums to provide information; responded to issues that arose from the community; and established a network of community-level contact persons through whom information was channeled to and from the host community. Future trials should adopt these strategies, and do better on aspects that did not work well in the MDP 301 trial. For instance, some sections of the community still felt left out of the trial process; not all volunteers received trial results promptly; some key stakeholders at the national level seemed left out of the results preparation activities; and the community found it difficult to come to terms with a flat result. The concept of the CAB needs rethinking to clarify and define its size, composition, selection criteria, functions, mandate and funding.

Community involvement in MDP 301 microbicide trial in Masaka: Successes and failures
The MDP 301 microbicide trial used multiple approaches at the Masaka site to mobilise and sensitise the community, get feedback, share information, and communicate the final trial results.
While this broad approach contributed to the success of the trial, a survey conducted early 2010 found no evidence that civil society advocacy groups were invited to contribute to the trial’s design and implementation. By outlining the key successes and failures of the trial’s community involvement initiatives, this brief highlights the need for HIV prevention research in general to follow good community participatory practice guidelines by nurturing