ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2012
Forms of benefit sharing in global health research undertaken in resource poor settings: a qualitative study of stakeholders' views in Kenya.
Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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.
- Community perceptions, trust, and experiences of malaria clinical research and participation in rural Cambodia.Tropical medicine and health · 2026Article
- Conflicting perspectives on what constitutes fair compensation and benefits among research stakeholders in Malawi.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- How community members in Uganda perceive controlled human infection studies.Research ethics · 2025Article
- Article
- Rethinking benefit sharing in collaborative human genetic research from an Afrocommunitarian perspective.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- 'Working relationships' across difference - a realist review of community engagement with malaria research.Wellcome open research · 2022Review
- Extending the CARE Principles from tribal research policies to benefit sharing in genomic research.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- A scoping review of considerations and practices for benefit sharing in biobanking.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Participant compensation in global health research: a case study.International health · 2020Article
- Providing a policy framework for responsible gene drive research: an analysis of the existing governance landscape and priority areas for further research.Wellcome open research · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Developing the ethics of implementation research in health.Implementation science : IS · 2016Article
- Public/community engagement in health research with men who have sex with men in sub-Saharan Africa: challenges and opportunities.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
- Enhancing quality and integrity in biomedical research in Africa: an international call for greater focus, investment and standardisation in capacity strengthening for frontline staff.BMC medical ethics · 2015Article
- Ethical considerations of physician career involvement in global health work: a framework.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2015Article
- Benefits in cash or in kind? A community consultation on types of benefits in health research on the Kenyan Coast.PloS one · 2015Article
- "When they see us, it's like they have seen the benefits!": experiences of study benefits negotiations in community-based studies on the Kenyan Coast.BMC medical ethics · 2014Article
- Benefit sharing: an exploration on the contextual discourse of a changing concept.BMC medical ethics · 2013Article
- '… in the project they really care for us': meaning and experiences of participating in a clinical study of first-line treatment for malaria and HIV in Tanzanian adults.Global public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncrease in global health research undertaken in resource poor settings in the last decade though a positive development has raised ethical concerns relating to potential for exploitation. Some of the suggested strategies to address these concerns include calls for providing universal standards of care, reasonable availability of proven interventions and more recently, promoting the overall social value of research especially in clinical research. Promoting the social value of research has been closely associated with providing fair benefits to various stakeholders involved in research. The debate over what constitutes fair benefits; whether those that addresses micro level issues of justice or those focusing on the key determinants of health at the macro level has continued. This debate has however not benefited from empirical work on what stakeholders consider fair benefits. This study explores practical experiences of stakeholders involved in global health research in Kenya, over what benefits are fair within a developing world context. METHODS AND
resultsWe conducted in-depth interviews with key informants drawn from within the broader health research system in Kenya including researchers from the mainstream health research institutions, networks and universities, teaching hospitals, policy makers, institutional review boards, civil society organisations and community representative groups.The range of benefits articulated by stakeholders addresses both micro and macro level concerns for justice by for instance, seeking to engage with interests of those facilitating research, and the broader systemic issues that make resource poor settings vulnerable to exploitation. We interpret these views to suggest a need for global health research to engage with current crises that face people in these settings as well as the broader systemic issues that produce them.
conclusionGlobal health research should provide benefits that address both the micro and macro level issues of justice in order to forestall exploitation. Embracing the two is however challenging in terms of how the various competing interests/needs should be balanced ethically, especially in the absence of structures to guide the process. This challenge should point to the need for greater dialogue to facilitate value clarification among stakeholders.
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.