Background The Curamericas/Guatemala Maternal and Child Health Project, 2011–2015, was implemented in the Western Highlands of the Department of Huehuetenango, Guatemala. The Project utilized three participatory approaches in tandem: the Census-Based, Impact-Oriented (CBIO) Approach, the Care Group Approach, and the Community Birthing Center Approach. Together, these are referred to as the Expanded CBIO Approach (or CBIO+). Objective This is the first article of a supplement that assesses the effectiveness of the Project’s community-based service delivery platform that was integrated into the Guatemalan government’s rural health care system and its special program for mothers and children called PEC (Programa de Extensión de Cobertura, or Extension of Coverage Program). Methods We review and summarize the CBIO+ Approach and its development. We also describe the Project Area, the structure and implementation of the Project, and its context. Results The CBIO+ Approach is the product of four decades of field work. The Project reached a population of 98,000 people, covering the entire municipalities of San Sebastián Coatán, Santa Eulalia, and San Miguel Acatán. After mapping all households in each community and registering all household members, the Project established 184 Care Groups, which were composed of 5–12 Care Group Volunteers who were each responsible for 10–15 households. Paid Care Group Promoters provided training in behavior change communication every two weeks to the Care Groups. Care Group Volunteers in turn passed this communication to the mothers in their assigned households and also reported back to the Care Group Promoters information about any births or deaths that they learned of during the previous two weeks as a result of their regular contact with their neighbors. At the outset of the Project, there was one Birthing Center in the Project Area, serving a small group of communities nearby. Two additional Birthing Centers began functioning as the Project was operating. The Birthing Centers encouraged the participation of traditional midwives (called comadronas) in the Project Area. Conclusion This article serves as an introduction to an assessment of the CBIO+ community-based, participatory approach as it was implemented by Curamericas/Guatemala in the Western Highlands of the Department of Huehuetenango, Guatemala. This article is the first of a series of articles in a supplement entitled Reducing Inequities in Maternal and Child Health in Rural Guatemala through the CBIO+ Approach of Curamericas.

Background The Curamericas/Guatemala Maternal and Child Health Project, 2011–2015, included implementation research designed to assess the effectiveness of an approach referred to as CBIO+ , composed of: (1) the Census-Based, Impact-Oriented (CBIO) Approach, (2) the Care Group Approach, and (3) the Community Birthing Center Approach. This is the second paper in a supplement of 10 articles describing the implementation research and its findings. Paper 1 describes CBIO+ , the Project Area, and how the Project was implemented. Objective This paper describes the implementation research design and details of how it was carried out. Methods We reviewed the original implementation research protocol and the methods used for all data collection related to this Project. The protocol and methods used for the implementation research related to this Project were all standard approaches to the monitoring and evaluation of child survival projects as developed by the United States Agency for International Development Child Survival and Health Grants Program (CSHGP) and the CORE Group. They underwent independent peer review supervised by the CSHGP before the implementation research began. Results The study area was divided into two sets of communities with a total population of 98,000 people. Project interventions were implemented in Area A from 2011 until the end of the project in 2015 (44 months) and in Area B from late 2013 until 2015 (20 months). Thus, Area B served as a quasi-comparison area during the first two years of Project implementation. The overarching study question was whether the CBIO+ Approach improved the health and well-being of children and mothers. The outcome indicators included (1) changes in population coverage of evidence-based interventions, (2) changes in childhood nutritional status, (3) changes in the mortality of children and mothers, (4) quality of care provided at Community Birthing Centers, (5) the impact of the Project on women’s empowerment and social capital, (6) stakeholder assessment of the effectiveness of the CBIO+ Approach, and (7) the potential of wider adoption of the CBIO+ Approach. Conclusion The implementation research protocol guided the assessment of the effectiveness of the CBIO+ Approach in improving the health and well-being of children, mothers, and their communities.

BackgroundThe landscape of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) research has changed drastically over the past three decades. With the remarkable success of antiretroviral treatment (ART) in decreasing AIDS-related mortality, some researchers have shifted their HIV research focus from treatment to cure research. The HIV cure research community often uses the term eradication to describe the science, and talks about eradicating the virus from the body. In public discourse, the term eradication could be conflated with disease eradication at the population level. In this paper, we call for a reframing of HIV cure research as control, as it is a more accurate descriptor and achievable goal in the foreseeable future.DiscussionThe properties of HIV are discordant with eradicability standards at both the individual level (as a clinical concept), and at the population level (as a public health concept). At the individual level, true eradication would necessitate absolute elimination of all latent HIV reservoirs from the body. Current HIV cure-related research strategies have proven unsuccessful at accurately quantifying, let alone eliminating these reservoirs. At the population level, eradication implies the permanent global reduction of HIV to zero new cases and to zero risk for future cases. Given the absence of an efficacious HIV vaccine and the impracticality and unethicality of eliminating animal reservoirs, global eradication of HIV is highly implausible. From a public health perspective, HIV eradication remains an elusive goal.ConclusionThe term ‘eradication’ is a misleading description of current HIV cure-related research. Instead, we call for the use of more realistic expressions such as ‘sustained virologic HIV suppression (or control)’ or ‘management of HIV persistence’ to describe HIV cure-related research. Using these terms reorients what HIV cure science can potentially achieve in the near future and avoids creating unrealistic expectations, particularly among the millions of people globally who live with HIV.

No abstract