ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2013
Experiencing everyday ethics in context: frontline data collectors perspectives and practices of bioethics.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Community perceptions, trust, and experiences of malaria clinical research and participation in rural Cambodia.Tropical medicine and health · 2026Article
- Bioethics and the value of disagreement.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- Unfair knowledge practices in global health: a realist synthesis.Health policy and planning · 2024Article
- Why the trial researcher matters: Day-to-day work viewed through the lens of normalization process theory.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2023Article
- Research and Innovation in Organ Donation: Recommendations From an International Consensus Forum.Transplantation direct · 2023Article
- Considering Risks to Researchers and Staff in Low-Resource Settings during Public Health Crises: A Proposed Conceptual Model.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- 'Why would they spend all this money and give us these items for free?': Exploring precarity and power in a cleaner cookstove intervention in rural Malawi.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- "'It is very difficult in this business if you want to have a good conscience': pharmaceutical governance and on-the-ground ethical labor in Ghana": a letter to editors.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2023Article
- The hidden emotional labour behind ensuring the social value of research: Experiences of frontline health policy and systems researchers based in Kenya during COVID-19.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Doing 'reciprocity work': The role of fieldworkers in a mass drug administration trial in the Gambia.Global public health · 2022Article
- Dealing with complicity in fieldwork: Reflections on studying genetic research in Pakistan.Sociology of health & illness · 2022Article
- 'Labouring' on the frontlines of global health research: mapping challenges experienced by frontline workers in Africa and Asia.Global public health · 2022Article
- Ethical Issues in Conducting Cross-Cultural Research in Low-Income Countries: A Pakistani Perspective.Asian bioethics review · 2022Article
- Consensus statement on measures to promote equitable authorship in the publication of research from international partnerships.Anaesthesia · 2022Article
- "Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2022Article
- 'Working relationships' across difference - a realist review of community engagement with malaria research.Wellcome open research · 2022Review
- Observational
- Understanding hard-to-reach communities: local perspectives and experiences of trachoma control among the pastoralist Maasai in northern Tanzania.Journal of biosocial science · 2021Article
- The ethical implications of verbal autopsy: responding to emotional and moral distress.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Data collectors play a vital role in producing scientific knowledge. They are also an important component in understanding the practice of bioethics. Yet, very little attention has been given to their everyday experiences or the context in which they are expected to undertake these tasks. This paper argues that while there has been extensive philosophical attention given to 'the what' and 'the why' in bioethics - what action is taken place and why - these should be considered along 'the who' - who are the individuals tasked with bioethics and what can their insights bring to macro-level and abstract discussions of bioethics. This paper will draw on the philosophical theories of Paul Ricoeur which compliments a sociological examination of data collectors experiences and use of their agency coupled with a concern for contextual and institutional factors in which they worked. In emphasising everyday experiences and contexts, I will argue that data collectors' practice of bioethics was shaped by their position at the frontline of face-to-face interactions with medical research participants and community members, alongside their own personal ethical values and motivations. Institutional interpretations of bioethics also imposed certain parameters on their bioethical practice but these were generally peripheral to their sense of obligation and the expectations conferred in witnessing the needs and suffering of those they encountered during their quotidian research duties. This paper will demonstrate that although the principle of autonomy has dominated discussions of bioethics and gaining informed consent seen as a central facet of ethical research by many research institutions, for data collectors this principle was seldom the most important marker of their ethical practice. Instead, data collectors were concerned with remedying the dilemmas they encountered through enacting their own interpretations of justice and beneficence and imposing their own agency on the circumstances they experienced. Their practice of bioethics demonstrates their contribution to the conduct of research and the shortcomings of an over-emphasis on autonomy.
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.