ArticleJournal of medical ethics2007
Benefit sharing: it's time for a definition.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What Do the Various Principles of Justice Mean Within the Concept of Benefit Sharing?Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2016Pooled it
- When genomics companies act as biobanks: governance challenges in an era of genomic assetization.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Developing a contextually and culturally relevant benefit-sharing framework for pathogen genomic research and biobanking in africa: a deliberative expert approach.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a participatory action project to improve safety and outcomes in maternity care.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander populations in genomic research.NPJ genomic medicine · 2024Review
- Beyond "business as usual": lessons from FIFA for fair benefit-sharing in global health.Health affairs scholar · 2024Article
- Webinar report: stakeholder perspectives on informed consent for the use of genomic data by commercial entities.Journal of medical ethics · 2023Article
- Consent Codes: Maintaining Consent in an Ever-expanding Open Science Ecosystem.Neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- Benefit sharing in international rivers: A Q-methodology study of regional understanding and perception in Asia.PloS one · 2023Article
- Addressing underrepresentation in genomics research through community engagement.American journal of human genetics · 2022Review
- Challenges to biobanking in LMICs during COVID-19: time to reconceptualise research ethics guidance for pandemics and public health emergencies?Journal of medical ethics · 2022Article
- Multilateral benefit-sharing from digital sequence information will support both science and biodiversity conservation.Nature communications · 2022Article
- The commercialization of biospecimens from Indigenous Peoples: A scoping review of benefit-sharing.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Benefit sharing in genomic and biobanking research in Uganda: Perceptions of researchers and research ethics committee members.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Rethinking benefit sharing in collaborative human genetic research from an Afrocommunitarian perspective.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- A scoping review of considerations and practices for benefit sharing in biobanking.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Stakeholder perspectives on the ethico-legal dimensions of biobanking in South Africa.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- The Rooibos Benefit Sharing Agreement-Breaking New Ground with Respect, Honesty, Fairness, and Care.Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees · 2020Article
- The Need for an Interdisciplinary Approach to Norm Diffusion: The Case of Fair and Equitable Benefit-sharing.Review of European, comparative & international environmental law · 2015Article
- Benefit sharing: an exploration on the contextual discourse of a changing concept.BMC medical ethics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Benefit sharing has been a recurrent theme in international debates for the past two decades. However, despite its prominence in law, medical ethics and political philosophy, the concept has never been satisfactorily defined. In this conceptual paper, a definition that combines current legal guidelines with input from ethics debates is developed. Philosophers like boxes; protective casings into which they can put concisely-defined concepts. Autonomy is the human capacity for self-determination; beneficence denotes the virtue of good deeds, coercion is the intentional threat of harm and so on. What about benefit sharing? Does the concept have a box and are the contents clearly defined? The answer to this question has to be no. The concept of benefit sharing is almost unique in that various disciplines use it regularly without precise definitions. In this article, a definition for benefit sharing is provided, to eliminate unnecessary ambiguity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.