{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02631578947368421, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0037593984962406013, 'mean_word_length': 5.922077922077922, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reciprocity and post-trial access for participants in antiretroviral therapy trials

Rationing antiretroviral therapy (ART) when need exceeds available supply raises many important and challenging questions [1–8]. Here, we focus on a particular ethical question that faces research sponsors, investigators, and policy-makers in various settings. Should research participants in ART trials have preference for further treatment over compatriots who have not participated, but who have a similar need and clinical eligibility for ART?