ArticlePloS one2018
Relative solidarity: Conceptualising communal participation in genomic research among potential research participants in a developing Sub-Saharan African setting.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Informed consent in genetic and genomic studies in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of bioethical issues.BMC medical ethics · 2025Pooled it
- Biobank consent preferences and implications for a mixed consent model: biomedical researchers vs. community stakeholders in a semi-urban Yoruba community, Nigeria.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Housing Influences on Active Aging: Perspectives from African Immigrant Elders in Chicago's South Side.Journal of healthy eating and active living · 2025Article
- Publics' knowledge of, attitude to and motivation towards health-related genomics: a scoping review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Digital tools for youth health promotion: principles, policies and practices in sub-Saharan Africa.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Towards trust-based governance of health data research.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2023Article
- Research-Related Stakeholders' Perspectives on Sociocultural Considerations in Biobanking Practice in South Africa.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2023Article
- Engaging publics in biobanking and genetic research governance - a literature review towards informing practice in India.Wellcome open research · 2021Article
- Tygerberg Research Ubuntu-Inspired Community Engagement Model: Integrating Community Engagement into Genomic Biobanking.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- Commentary 2: Remuneration for Community Advisory Board (CAB) Members: A Call for Remuneration Guidelines for CAB Members in Biomedical Research.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2019Article
- Article
- Exploring the Role of Shared Decision Making in the Consent Process for Pediatric Genomics Research in Cameroon, Tanzania, and Ghana.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAs genomic research gathers momentum in sub-Saharan Africa, it has become increasingly important to understand the reasons why individuals wish to participate in this kind of medical research. Against the background of communitarianism conceived as typical of African communities, it is often suggested that individuals consent to participate on the grounds of solidarity and to further the common good. In this paper, we seek to explore this contention by presenting data from focus groups with potential research participants about what would influence their decisions to participate in genomic research. METHODS AND
resultsThese focus groups were conducted as part of a larger qualitative study with a purposively selected group of participants from a community situated in south west Nigeria. We conducted fifteen focus group sessions comprising 50 participants organized by age and sex, namely: 1) adult (>30 years) males, 2) adult females, 3) youth (18-30 years) males, and 4) youth females. A mixed age-group was conducted to probe different views between the age groups. There was discordance and clear division between the adults and youths regarding the decision to participate in genomic research based on commitment to communal values. Adults based their decision to participate on altruism and furthering the common good while youths based their decisions on personal benefits and preferences and also took into account the views and welfare of family members and neighbours.
conclusionsThis discordance suggests a 'generational shift' and we advance a model of 'relative solidarity' among the youths, which is different from the communal solidarity model typical of African communitarianism. Our findings suggest the need for a closer look at strategies for implementation of community engagement and informed consent in genomic research in this region, and we recommend further studies to explore this emerging trend.
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.