ReviewBMJ global health2020
Regulating international clinical research: an ethical framework for policy-makers.
Review in BMJ global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Limited inclusion in clinical trials and access to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in racial and ethnic minority patients with cancer: a narrative review.The oncologist · 2026Review
- Article
- When herds overgraze: the cost of conformity in oncology drug development.BMJ oncology · 2026Article
- The landscape of inter-institutional and multinational collaborations in Kawasaki disease.Paediatrics & child health · 2025Article
- Global Equity in Clinical Trials: An ASCO Policy Statement.JCO global oncology · 2024Article
- The critical need to accelerate cerebral palsy research with consumer engagement, global networks, and adaptive designs.Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
- Towards achieving transnational research partnership equity: lessons from implementing adaptive platform trials in low- and middle-income countries.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Data flow within global clinical trials: a scoping review.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Harnessing Clinical Trial Capacity to Mitigate Zoonotic Diseases: The Role of Expert Scientists in Ethiopia.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global distribution of clinical trials is shifting to low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), and adequate regulations are essential for protecting the rights and interests of research participants in these countries. However, policy-makers in LMICs can face an ethical trade-off: stringent regulatory protections for participants can lead researchers or sponsors to conduct their research elsewhere, potentially depriving the local population of the opportunity to benefit from international clinical research. In this paper, we propose a three-step ethical framework that helps policy-makers to navigate this trade-off. We use a recent set of regulatory protections in Chile to illustrate the practical value of our proposed framework, providing original ethical analysis and previously unpublished data from Chile obtained through freedom of information requests.
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.