Research -
evidence for change.
Evidence is at the heart of our work at The Love Tank; and building this evidence - through research and community knowledge generation - is a vital part of what we do. It’s essential that we understand the needs and experiences of communities that we work alongside so that the change we make is meaningful and wanted. We think that evidence comes in lots of forms and places including the lived experience of our team and the people who work with us; the knowledge of the communities we meet; and new qualitative and quantitative research we help produce.
-
Read more about our principles of research collaboration here.
Current and RecenT
research programmes
and collaborations
-
PANTHEON
With academic partners at University College London, The Love Tank supported the development of a community-informed action framework and tool-kit to facilitate and promote HIV self-testing service delivery in England and Wales and improve health equity. You can read the tool-kit here.
-
Preventx
The Love Tank is carrying out a three-year programme of research for Preventx – the company that partner with the NHS to provide access to free at-home sexual health tests. The work aims to identify sexual health needs, barriers to access, and perceptions of Preventx’s self-testing services among key target populations, including those currently underserved by sexual health services. You can find out more about this work (and sign up to take part) here.
-
AMAP EVALUATION
Between November 2021 and March 2022, PrEPster at The Love Tank piloted a peer mobilisation programme called Ask Me About PrEP in England. The pilot recruited, trained and supported 96 mobilisers, who engaged with almost 12,000 people about PrEP. The pilot's evaluation is available here.
-
HIV PrEP and young gay and bisexual men
In November and December 2023 The Love Tank undertook qualitative research with gay and bisexual men between the ages of 18-25 in London to understand barriers to accessing HIV PrEP. The research found that accessing clinic appointments was the single biggest barrier to PrEP. The study report is available here.
-
What might a community HIV PrEP model look like?
The same research explored the acceptability of a community HIV PrEP model, based on the under-the-radar MPOX outreach that was undertaken by The Love Tank in 2022-2023. The findings of that research are available here.
-
The drug and alcohol needs of queer people in London
In 2022, The Love Tank conducted desk-based research and interviews to better understand queer communities’ drug and alcohol-related needs and what services exist in London to meet them. This research identified significant gaps in the knowledge of drug and alcohol needs and provision of services for, in particular, queer men of colour, queer migrants, and transgender communities. You can read the report, which highlights routes for future work, here.
-
The acceptability of MPOX treatments in individuals with diagnosed MPOX
At the start of 2024, again partnering with the SHARE Collaborative at Queen Mary University of London, we did further research to understand the acceptability of using a treatment for MPOX called Tecovirimat (TPOXX). The research asked people who had had MPOX about their experiences, and their access to treatment and care. We asked them if they would have used TPOXX if it had been offered. The findings of that research, undertaken for the World Health Organisation (WHO) is available here.
-
MPOX work with WHO/QM
In 2023, The Love Tank partnered with Queen Mary University of London on research about MPOX. We spoke to people who had experience of having MPOX and people who were more likely to be involved in MPOX exposure. The research helped to understand how and whether health promotion interventions helped people change how they lead their lives during the 2022 MPOX outbreak. The findings of that research, undertaken for the World Health Organisation (WHO) will be available soon.
-
A framework for addressing HIV PrEP needs
How might we better understand how to address access to HIV PrEP? Building on PrEPster at The Love Tank’s practice and research, we developed a working conceptual framework for considering HIV PrEP need and how we might collectively prioritise responding to that need.
-
Partnership for Black People’s Health
Partnership For Black People’s Health is a community-led research project that engages Black African and Black Caribbean communities in research to reduce the disproportionate burden of health inequalities faced in medicine and public health. A partnership of academics, medics, community-organisations, and communities strives to develop and implement research, to create a more equitable healthcare. More information is available here.
-
The PRIME study
From 2023 The Love Tank was the community partner in the PRIME study. Undertaken in collaboration with UKHSA, PRIME seeks to understand whether MPOX can be transmitted by people who do not have symptoms. The Love Tank led on community recruitment for the project, the results of which will be available soon.
-
The RiiSH survey
Launched in 2020, Reducing Inequalities in Sexual Health (RiiSH) is an on-going survey-based research project led by University of London that aims to improve understanding of and public health messaging for queer communities who are more likely to acquire STIs or HIV. The Love Tank assisted in community recruitment to RiiSH, in developing survey questions, and in conducting formative focus groups to refine elements of the survey.
-
Not PrEPared survey
In November 2022 The Love Tank launched findings of a survey undertaken in collaboration with National Aids Trust, Terrence Higgins Trust, Sophia Forum, and One Voice Network into barriers to HIV PrEP in England. Read the full report here.
-
Public understanding of and responses to MPOX outbreak
This cross-sectional survey was conducted with colleagues at Queen Mary University SHARE Collaborative. The Love Tank co-developed the survey, and led recruitment strategies. Key findings were published here.
-
Annual HIV PrEP survey
Between 2017 and 2020, The Love Tank collaborated with IwantPrEPNow and Public Health England (now UKHSA) on four annual HIV PrEP surveys. Early headline findings were published in Aidsmap in 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020. Journal articles were published for the 2019 survey including on use of Doxy PEP, as well as conference papers for the 2020 survey.
-
PrEP Champs
How much different groups of people in London know about PrEP and what are the barriers to HIV PrEP access? The PrEP Champs pilot, run in collaboration with the GMI Partnership, was instrumental in guiding PrEP outreach into the future. Read the findings here.
-
MobPrESH
What are the key learnings from undertaking a peer-led HIV PrEP pilot with women? PrEPster at The Love Tank worked with The Brigstowe Project in Bristol and Yorkshire MESMAC in Leeds to pilot this approach. The findings are available here and here.
-
DIY HIV PrEP
How did London based HIV PrEP users navigate obtaining and using HIV PrEP prior to its availability on the NHS? Research undertaken by PrEPster at The Love Tank, with the Graduate Institute in Geneva, helped us find out more, and shape our practice. The findings from the qualitative research can be read here.
-
Generic PrEP testing
In the summer of 2018, PrEPster at The Love Tank, in collaboration with Imperial College London, undertook lab tests on HIV PrEP pills that were purchased online. The research sought to establish if the PrEP being bought via the internet was real. It was. Read the findings here and here.
“Can The Love Tank help out with my research?”
The Love Tank CIC receives frequent requests to assist in research collaborations. As an organisation that is evidence driven, we encourage and support the generation of ideas, theories and evidence that supports health and wellbeing.
In addition to supporting the generation of evidence for change, we foster principles around involvement and inclusion in the research collaborations we decide to be part of.
If you are approaching us with a request to collaborate on or to support research, we will ask you to consider the following sets of principles before engaging in collaboration.
If your research proposal does not meet, or cannot move towards the majority of the principles, then we are unlikely to support or collaborate on the research. If your research concepts do not meet these principles, we are open to dialogue about how the principles might be better met for this research, or your proposals in the future.
By collaborations we include assisting researchers in recruiting to their research, such as through promotion of surveys or through advertising of research participation.
-
We are more likely to engage in research collaborations that have foundations and were generated within the communities or populations that they seek to benefit. Research proposals that demonstrate that they respond to the needs of a community or population and that has involved those communities in generating the research concepts are more likely to be prioritised. ‘Outsider’ research is unlikely to be supported.
-
We are more likely to engage in research collaborations that identify and describe a tangible benefit to a community or population. We are unlikely to assist in research that seeks to make commercial gain for one particular company or product. ‘Market research’ for one particular product is unlikely to be supported.
-
In addition to demonstrating engagement of the research beneficiaries in concept generation, we are more likely to engage in collaborations that build research capacity. For example, if research fieldwork is being undertaken with a particular population, what efforts have been made to recruit field staff from within that population? What further steps have been taken to train, develop, capacity-build and to retain such community researchers beyond the scope of the research project?
-
We are more likely to engage in research collaborations that have clear policies for compensating research participants for their involvement. If research methods involve focus groups, interviews (face to face, phone, virtual), and other active involvement methods then minimal compensation (e.g. travel) is expected. Collaborations are more likely to be engaged with when compensation more fully rewards participants for their time, knowledge and expertise, and goes beyond an altruist assumption of participants, and values their input. This can include payment, or payment in kind (e.g. vouchers), and covering additional expenses such as childcare or other social care costs. We encourage thoughtful and innovative compensation mechanisms: for example, if researching sex workers, offering the same financial compensation that would have been earned undertaking sex work during the research time.
In addition, if community members or advocates are being utilized to recruit to or undertake research, similar compensation approaches should be taken. This should include identifying salary budgets to adequately pay for such work to be undertaken.
It is not justifiable for the only members of research collaborations to be paid/compensated are the academics and researchers involved in the collaboration.
-
In most instances we will be more willing to participate in research collaborations that have received, or have commenced application towards ethics approval from a recognised research institution. We acknowledge that such processes restrict some community based and more grassroots based research. In those instances we will be open to collaborators that can demonstrate knowledge of and ability to engage in good ethical research practice.
-
All research has parameters pertaining to who is included in research. Our experience of involvement in HIV prevention research suggests that decisions to exclude some key populations from research is sometimes unfounded. As such, we will be more willing to collaborate on research that can demonstrate why certain exclusions have been made, and to provide robust rationale as to why. As recent examples, we have been more willing to participate in research collaborations that include trans men from HIV prevention research into men-who-have-sex-with-men.
-
Community-advisory boards (CABs) provide a well-tested and robust mechanism for engaging with and involving a research population. CAB members should be compensated for their time, knowledge and skills (see above). They should have clear mechanisms for engagement, and how their involvement will lead to greater engagement beyond the CAB.
A drawback of CAB based models is that they can be made-up of individuals and ‘community-members’ that do not represent the populations being researched. For example, CABs made up of community-based HIV organization representatives for a PrEP research project might consist of CEOs and senior managers of the organisations who are not (potential) PrEP users, rather than the populations actually being researched. In addition, CABs can take a ‘gate keeper’ role – both deciding what groups the researchers might have access to, and/or withholding key research findings from the participants.
As such, we are more likely to engage in research collaborations that move beyond CAB models of engagement.
-
We are more likely to engage in research collaborations that articulate the methods in which the beneficiary populations might get to understand the research findings. Meaningful dissemination and engagement activities such as community publications, blogs, podcasts, workshops or events are much more likely to attract our collaboration than (closed-access) peer reviewed journal outputs.
Want to choose The Love Tank as a research partner?
The Love Tank has a wealth of skills and experience in community-based research, including facilitating focus groups, survey design, one-to-one research interviews, and action-based research practice. Contact our Head of Research and Community Knowledge Generation to find out more.