ArticleBMC medical ethics2015
Readiness of ethics review systems for a changing public health landscape in the WHO African Region.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of accelerated research: strategies for implementation as applied in a phase 1 Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo two-dose Ebola vaccine clinical trial in Uganda.Global health action · 2020Trial
- Microfluidic innovations in chronic kidney disease and renal fibrosis: from mechanistic insights to clinical applications.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Health Research Ethics in Southern Africa: Building Capacity and Cultivating Excellence.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2025Article
- Action for Increasing Diversity, Market Access, and Capacity in Oncology Registration Trials-Is Africa the Answer? Report From a Satellite Session of the Accelerating Anti-Cancer Agent Development and Validation Workshop.JCO global oncology · 2022Article
- Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
- Measuring the outcome and impact of research capacity strengthening initiatives: A review of indicators used or described in the published and grey literature.F1000Research · 2020Article
- Research approvals iceberg: how a 'low-key' study in England needed 89 professionals to approve it and how we can do better.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- The Role of The African Vaccine Regulatory Forum (AVAREF) in The Accelerated Clinical Evaluation of Ebola Vaccine Candidates During the Large West Africa Epidemic.Journal of immunological sciences · 2018Article
- Vaccine development and trials in low and lower-middle income countries: Key issues, advances and future opportunities.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2017Review
- New ethical considerations in vaccine trials.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2017Article
- A time for new north-south relationships in global health.International journal of general medicine · 2017Article
- Global Forum 2015 dialogue on "From evidence to policy - thinking outside the box": perspectives to improve evidence uptake and good practices in the African Region.BMC health services research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing emphasis on research, development and innovation for health in providing solutions to the high burden of diseases in the African Region has warranted a proliferation of studies including clinical trials. This changing public health landscape requires that countries develop adequate ethics review capacities to protect and minimize risks to study participants. Therefore, this study assessed the readiness of national ethics committees to respond to challenges posed by a globalized biomedical research system which is constantly challenged by new public health threats, rapid scientific and technological advancements affecting biomedical research and development, delivery and manufacture of vaccines and therapies, and health technology transfer.
methodsThis is a descriptive study, which used a questionnaire structured to elicit information on the existence of relevant national legal frameworks, mechanisms for ethical review; as well as capacity requirements for national ethics committees. The questionnaire was available in English and French and was sent to 41 of the then 46 Member States of the WHO African Region, excluding the five Lusophone Member States. Information was gathered from senior officials in ministries of health, who by virtue of their offices were considered to have expert knowledge of research ethics review systems in their respective countries.
resultsThirty three of the 41 countries (80.5 %) responded. Thirty (90.9 %) of respondent countries had a national ethics review committee (NEC); 79 % of which were established by law. Twenty-five (83.3 %) NECs had secretarial and administrative support. Over 50 % of countries with NECs indicated a need for capacity strengthening through periodic training on international guidelines for health research (including clinical trials) ethics; and allocation of funds for administrative and secretariat support.
conclusionsDespite the existing training initiatives, the Region still experiences a shortage of professionals trained in health research ethics/ethicists. Committees continue to face various capacity needs especially for evaluating clinical trials, for monitoring ongoing research, database management and for accrediting institutional ethics committees. Given the growing number of clinical trials involving human participants in the African Region, there is urgent need for supporting countries without NECs to establish them; capacity strengthening where they exist; and creation of a regional network and joint ethical review mechanisms, whose membership would be open to all NECs of the Region.
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.