ArticleBMJ global health2017
Gendered negotiations for research participation in community-based studies: implications for health research policy and practice.
Article in BMJ global health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Community engagement in research in sub-Saharan Africa: current practices, barriers, facilitators, ethical considerations and the role of gender - a systematic review.The Pan African medical journal · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review on ethical challenges of 'field' research in low-income and middle-income countries: respect, justice and beneficence for research staff?BMJ global health · 2021Pooled it
- Transforming infectious disease control through social innovation, community engagement and intersectional gender research.BMJ global health · 2026Review
- Through the eyes of the participant: using photovoice to understand the experiences and effects of ivermectin MDA in the context of the BOHEMIA clinical trial in Kwale, Kenya.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- From informed consent to adherence: factors influencing involvement in mass drug administration with ivermectin for malaria elimination in The Gambia.Malaria journal · 2021Article
- Researcher and study participants' perspectives of consent in clinical studies in four referral hospitals in Vietnam.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Food Perceptions and Dietary Changes for Chronic Condition Management in Rural Peru: Insights for Health Promotion.Nutrients · 2018Article
- Gender equality in the global health workplace: learning from a Somaliland-UK paired institutional partnership.BMJ global health · 2018Article
- Ethical considerations in Controlled Human Malaria Infection studies in low resource settings: Experiences and perceptions of study participants in a malaria Challenge study in Kenya.Wellcome open research · 2018Article
- Africa: Women's invisible power.Nature · 2017Article
- 20 years of gender mainstreaming in health: lessons and reflections for the neglected tropical diseases community.BMJ global health · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is a growing literature documenting the complex realities of consent processes in the field, and the negotiations and ethical dilemmas involved. Much has also been written about how gender and power shape household decision-making processes. However, these bodies of literature have rarely been brought together to inform research theory and practice in low-income settings. In this paper, qualitative research (observation, focus group discussions and interviews) were used alongside large clinical community-based studies conducted on the Kenyan Coast to explore how gender and power relations within households and communities and between fieldworkers and communities shape consent processes and interactions. This exploration is embedded in relevant literature and the implications for community-based health research policy and practice are considered. Across diverse forms of households, we observed significant consultation on whether or not to participate in research. Although men are typically described as household decision-makers, in practice, decision-making processes are often far more nuanced, with many women using their agency to control, sometimes subtly, the decisions made. Where decisions are made without adequately consulting women, many find strategies to exercise their choice, in ways that safeguard important relationships within households in the longer term. We also found that the gender of field staff who typically conduct research activities in the field, including consent processes, can influence household dynamics and decision-making processes with important implications for the science and ethics of research. It is essential that frontline field staff and their supervisors are aware of the complex and gendered realities of consent processes at household level, and their implications, and that they develop appropriate context-informed approaches that support ethical practice.
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.