Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24028325›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2013

Benefit sharing: an exploration on the contextual discourse of a changing concept.

Bege Dauda, Kris Dierickx

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Structural Racism in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Moving Forward.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Bege DaudaCentre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Faculty of Medicine KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35, Box 7001, Leuven B-3000, Belgium. kris.dierickx@med.kuleuven.be.
Kris Dierickx

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe concept of benefit sharing has been a topical issue on the international stage for more than two decades, gaining prominence in international law, research ethics and political philosophy. In spite of this prominence, the concept of benefit sharing is not devoid of controversies related to its definition and justification. This article examines the discourses and justifications of benefit sharing concept. DISCUSSION: We examine the discourse on benefit sharing within three main spheres; namely: common heritage of humankind, access and use of genetic resources according to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and international clinical research. Benefit sharing has changed from a concept that is enshrined in a legally binding regulation in the contexts of common heritage of humankind and CBD to a non-binding regulation in international clinical research. Nonetheless, there are more ethical justifications that accentuate benefit sharing in international clinical research than in the contexts of common heritage of humankind and the CBD. SUMMARY: There is a need to develop a legal framework in order to strengthen the advocacy and decisiveness of benefit sharing practice in international health research. Based on this legal framework, research sponsors would be required to provide a minimum set of possible benefits to participants and communities in research. Such legal framework on benefit sharing will encourage research collaboration with local communities; and dispel mistrust between research sponsors and host communities. However, more research is needed, drawing from other international legal frameworks, to understand how such a legal framework on benefit sharing can be successfully formulated in international health research.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchConcept FormationInformation DisseminationInternational CooperationEthics, ResearchHumansSocial Justice

Identifiers

PMID24028325
PMCPMC3847211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.