ArticlePloS one2015
Research Stakeholders' Views on Benefits and Challenges for Public Health Research Data Sharing in Kenya: The Importance of Trust and Social Relations.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open government data in health sector: a systematic literature review open government data in health sector.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Ethical Considerations for Engaging Children and Adolescents Living with HIV in Research in African Countries: A Systematic Review.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2023Pooled it
- Overlapping research efforts in a global pandemic: a rapid systematic review of COVID-19-related individual participant data meta-analyses.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Community engagement processes in low- and middle-income countries health research settings: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Attitudes of Longitudinal Study Participants and Members of the Public Towards Data Sharing for Secondary Research: A Survey Based Approach.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- Reconciling global collaboration and data sovereignty in neuroscience.Nature neuroscience · 2026Review
- Collective action for responsible global health data sharing and use.BMJ global health · 2026Review
- Identifying the motivators, benefits and barriers to sharing participant-level data and samples: results from an international online survey of acute febrile illness cohort teams.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Digitalisation of medicine in LMICs (sub-Saharan Africa): enablers, barriers, and funding strategies for sustainable health systems.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Unmasking the ethical dimensions of data-sharing in health research: perspectives from researchers at a public university in Uganda.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Bridging Trust and Collaborative Research in Low-Income Contexts During Public Health Emergencies: A Sierra Leone Case Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Data as scientific currency: Challenges experienced by researchers with sharing health data in sub-Saharan Africa.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Patients' and Members of the Public's Wishes Regarding Transparency in the Context of Secondary Use of Health Data: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- What constitutes equitable data sharing in global health research? A scoping review of the literature on low-income and middle-income country stakeholders' perspectives.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Ethical considerations around volunteer payments in a malaria human infection study in Kenya: an embedded empirical ethics study.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Benefit sharing in genomic and biobanking research in Uganda: Perceptions of researchers and research ethics committee members.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Model for developing context-sensitive responses to vulnerability in research: managing ethical dilemmas faced by frontline research staff in Kenya.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Construction and Piloting of Attitude Towards Research Participation Scale for University Students.Psychology research and behavior management · 2021Article
- Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "Solidarity and Community Engagement in Global Health Research".The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2020Article
- What Is Dissemination and Implementation Science?: An Introduction and Opportunities to Advance Behavioral Medicine and Public Health Globally.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing recognition of the importance of sharing research data within the international scientific community, but also of the ethical and social challenges this presents, particularly in the context of structural inequities and varied capacity in international research. Public involvement is essential to building locally responsive research policies, including on data sharing, but little research has involved stakeholders from low-to-middle income countries.
methodsBetween January and June 2014, a qualitative study was conducted in Kenya involving sixty stakeholders with varying experiences of research in a deliberative process to explore views on benefits and challenges in research data sharing. In-depth interviews and extended small group discussions based on information sharing and facilitated debate were used to collect data. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis, and charting flow and dynamics in debates.
findingsThe findings highlight both the opportunities and challenges of communicating about this complex and relatively novel topic for many stakeholders. For more and less research-experienced stakeholders, ethical research data sharing is likely to rest on the development and implementation of appropriate trust-building processes, linked to local perceptions of benefits and challenges. The central nature of trust is underpinned by uncertainties around who might request what data, for what purpose and when. Key benefits perceived in this consultation were concerned with the promotion of public health through science, with legitimate beneficiaries defined differently by different groups. Important challenges were risks to the interests of study participants, communities and originating researchers through stigmatisation, loss of privacy, impacting autonomy and unfair competition, including through forms of intentional and unintentional 'misuse' of data. Risks were also seen for science. DISCUSSION: Given background structural inequities in much international research, building trust in this low-to-middle income setting includes ensuring that the interests of study participants, primary communities and originating researchers will be promoted as far as possible, as well as protected. Important ways of building trust in data sharing include involving the public in policy development and implementation, promoting scientific collaborations around data sharing and building close partnerships between researchers and government health authorities to provide checks and balances on data sharing, and promote near and long-term translational benefits.
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.