Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Enumeration of Major Peripheral Blood Leukocyte Populations for Multicenter Clinical Trials Using a Whole Blood Phenotyping Assay
Published on: September 16, 2012
Enrolling study personnel in Ebola vaccine trials: from guidelines to practice in a non-epidemic context
Edouard Lhomme1, Camara Modet2, Augustin Augier2
1Univ. Bordeaux, Inserm, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, UMR 1219, CHU Bordeaux, CIC 1401, EUCLID/F-CRIN Clinical Trials Platform, F-33000, Bordeaux, France. edouard.lhomme@u-bordeaux.fr.
Background:
Enrolling participants in clinical trials can be challenging, especially with respect to prophylactic vaccine trials. The vaccination of study personnel in Ebola vaccine trials during the 2014-2016 epidemic played a crucial role in inspiring trust and facilitating volunteer enrollment. We evaluated the ethical and methodological considerations as they applied to an ongoing phase 2 randomized prophylactic Ebola vaccine trial that enrolled healthy volunteers in Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Mali in a non-epidemic context.
Methods:
On the assumption that the personnel on site involved in executing the protocol, as well as community mobilizers (not involved in the on-site procedures), might also volunteer to enter the trial, we considered both ethical and methodological considerations to set clear rules that can be shared a priori with these persons. We reviewed the scientific and gray literature to identify relevant references and then conducted an analysis of the ethical and methodological considerations.
Results:
There are currently no regulations preventing a clinical investigator or site staff from participating in a trial. However, the enrollment of personnel raises the risk of undue influence and challenges the basic ethical principle of voluntary participation. The confidentiality of personal medical information, such as HIV test results, may also be difficult to ensure among personnel. There is a risk of disruption of trial operations due to the potential absence of the personnel for their commitment as trial participants, and there is also a potential for introducing differential behavior of on-site staff as they obtain access to accumulating information during the trial (e.g., the incidence of adverse events). Blinding could be jeopardized, given knowledge of product-specific adverse event profiles and the proximity to unblinded site staff. These aspects were considered more relevant for on-site staff than for community mobilizers, who have limited contact with site staff.
Conclusion:
In a non-epidemic context, ethical and methodological considerations limit the collective benefit of enrolling site staff in a vaccine trial. These considerations do not apply to community mobilizers, whose potential enrollment should be considered as long as they meet the inclusion criteria and they are not exposed to any form of coercion.
Related Concept Videos
Vaccinations
Self Within Cultural Contexts
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Guidelines for Nursing Documentation II
Timely documentation is crucial to ensure continuity of care for patients. Any delays in recording or reporting medical information can result in medical errors and even adverse patient outcomes. From medication administration to diagnostic test results, every detail must be accurately and promptly documented to provide the best possible care for patients.

