ArticleCritical public health2019
The masking and making of fieldworkers and data in postcolonial Global Health research contexts.
Article in Critical public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A results to action framework for community verification: A case study from a performance based financing program in Zimbabwe.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Doing 'reciprocity work': The role of fieldworkers in a mass drug administration trial in the Gambia.Global public health · 2022Article
- Consensus statement on measures to promote equitable authorship in the publication of research from international partnerships.Anaesthesia · 2022Article
- How Black and Latino young men who have sex with men in the United States experience and engage with eligibility criteria and recruitment practices: implications for the sustainability of community-based research.Critical public health · 2022Article
- Power analysis in health policy and systems research: a guide to research conceptualisation.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Monitoring, reporting and regulating medicine quality: tensions between theory and practice in Tanzania.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- The Structural and Intercultural Competence for Epidemiological Studies (SICES) guidelines: a 22-item checklist.BMJ global health · 2021Review
- The Community Lab of Ideas for Health: Community-Based Transdisciplinary Solutions in a Malaria Elimination Trial in The Gambia.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Bridging research integrity and global health epidemiology (BRIDGE) guidelines: explanation and elaboration.BMJ global health · 2020Review
- The ghost in the data: Evidence gaps and the problem of fake drugs in global health research.Global public health · 2020Review
- The masking and making of fieldworkers and data in postcolonial Global Health research contexts.Critical public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper centres on the roles and contributions of fieldworkers-local data-collectors in Global Health research in postcolonial contexts. It is informed by two separate ethnographies, conducted in two different East African biomedical research institutions. It discusses how common characterisations of fieldworkers as 'low-skilled' and 'local' make them attractive to research institutions in two important ways - as community-embedded data-collectors thus facilitating community participation and as being unlikely to fabricate data because they lack the skills to avoid detection. This paper questions these assumptions. It draws on Daston's idea of the 'scientific persona' and Fanon's concepts of mask-making to explore how fieldworkers construct identities and data within their liminal roles. Fieldworkers create particular pseudo-personae or masks for getting and staying employed. They dumb-down CVs and emphasise their similarities with community members in ways which are partially 'real' but also 'fake'. These constructed identities provide fieldworkers with a persona that allows them to fabricate or modify data without raising suspicions. They frequently engage in practices known as 'genuine fake' data fabrication which is data perceived as factually correct and verifiable yet methodologically incorrect, hence it is real and fake in varying degrees. We understand the 'pseudo' as the blurry space between real and fake where fieldworkers construct their identities and data. Given the seemingly laudable aims of Global Health, we argue that fieldworkers' masking and making up data signal the need for greater attention by those designing its research, to better understand and address why and how these practices unfold.
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.