ReviewMaternal & child nutrition2013
Nutrition research in rural communities: application of ethical principles.
Review in Maternal & child nutrition, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of community-based nutrition on infant nutrition and associated health practices in Narok, Kenya.African health sciences · 2020Article
- A Malawi guideline for research study participant remuneration.Wellcome open research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This narrative review focuses on ethics related to nutrition-specific community-based research, within the framework of science for society, and focusing on the rights and well-being of fieldworkers and research participants. In addition to generally accepted conditions of scientific validity, such as adequate sample size, unbiased measurement outcome and suitable study population, research needs to be appropriate and feasible within the local context. Communities' suspicions about research can be overcome through community participation and clear dialogue. Recruitment of fieldworkers and research participants should be transparent and guided by project-specific selection criteria. Fieldworkers need to be adequately trained, their daily schedules and remuneration must be realistic, and their inputs to the study must be recognized. Fieldworkers may be negatively affected emotionally, financially and physically. Benefits to research participants may include physical and psychological benefits, minimal economic benefit, and health education; while risks may be of a physical, psychological, social, or economic nature. Targeting individuals in high-risk groups may result in social stigmatization. The time burden to the research participant can be minimized by careful attention to study procedures and questionnaire design. Potential benefits to the community, fieldworkers and research participants and anticipated knowledge to be gained should outweigh and justify the potential risks. Researchers should have an exit strategy for study participants. For effective dissemination of results to individual research participants, the host community and nutrition community, the language, format and level of presentation need to be appropriate for the target audience.
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.