Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27525652›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

The Importance of Blood Is Infinite: Conceptions of Blood as Life Force, Rumours and Fear of Trial Participation in a Fulani Village in Rural Gambia.

Sarah O'Neill, Susan Dierickx, Joseph Okebe, Edgard Dabira, Charlotte Gryseels, Umberto d'Alessandro, Koen Peeters Grietens

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Sarah O'NeillUnit of Medical Anthropology, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Susan DierickxUnit of Medical Anthropology, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Joseph OkebeMedical Research Council Gambia, Fajara, The Gambia.
Edgard DabiraMedical Research Council Gambia, Fajara, The Gambia.
Charlotte GryseelsUnit of Medical Anthropology, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Umberto d'AlessandroUnit of Medical Anthropology, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Koen Peeters GrietensUnit of Medical Anthropology, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Instituut voor Tropische Geneeskunde · BEMRC Unit the Gambia · GMLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBNagasaki University · JP

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_EX_MR/J002364/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical trials require high levels of participation and low drop-out rates to be successful. However, collecting blood samples from individuals recruited into clinical trials can be challenging when there is reticence about blood-taking. In addition to concerns regarding the feasibility of medical research, fears of 'blood-stealing' and 'blood-selling' have ethical implications related to cultural sensitivity and informed consent. This study explores anxieties around blood-taking during a malaria treatment trial in the Gambia.

methodsThis case study is based on ethnographic research in one theoretically selected village due to the high reticence to screening for the clinical trial 'Primaquine's gametocytocidal efficacy in malaria asymptomatic carriers treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine' carried out in the Gambia between 2013 and 2014. Data collection tools included in-depth interviews, participant observation, informal conversations and group discussions.

resultsIn total only 176 of 411 habitants (42%) in the village accepted having a bloodspot taken to screen for malaria. Although trial recruitment was initially high in the village, some families refused screening when rumours started spreading that the trial team was taking too much blood. Concerns about 'loss of blood' were equated to loss of strength and lack of good food to replenish bodily forces. Families in the study village were concerned about the weakness of their body while they had to harvest their crops at the time of recruitment for the trial.

conclusionA common recommendation to prevent and avoid rumours against public health interventions and trials is the provision of full and consistent information during the consent procedure, which is assumed to lead to more accurate knowledge of the purpose of the intervention and increased trial participation. However, even when information provision is continuous, the emergence of rumours can be related to times of uncertainty and perceptions of vulnerability, which are often a reflection of structural inequalities and diverging value orientations between communities and public health institutions.

Indexed as

BloodClinical Trials as TopicCultureFearRural PopulationAdultBlood DonorsBlood Specimen CollectionChildFemaleGambiaHumansMalariaMalePatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Selection

Identifiers

PMID27525652
PMCPMC4985146
OpenAlexW2509537329

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.