ArticleLife sciences, society and policy2020
Governance of research consortia: challenges of implementing Responsible Research and Innovation within Europe.
Article in Life sciences, society and policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ethical and legal landscape of brain data governance.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Ten simple rules for coordinating a large digital health project: Perspectives from EU and implications for global contexts.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Bridging research and practice for dementia care: strategies and challenges of public and private funders in the dissemination and implementation of dementia research.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- An ethics framework for the transition to an operational learning healthcare system.Learning health systems · 2024Article
- Building a Sustainable Learning Health Care System for Pregnant and Lactating People: Interview Study Among Data Access Providers.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2024Article
- Community perspectives on AI/ML and health equity: AIM-AHEAD nationwide stakeholder listening sessions.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- A mixed-methods analysis to understand the implementation of a multistakeholder research consortium: Environmental influences on child health outcomes (ECHO).Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- NAVIGATOR: an Italian regional imaging biobank to promote precision medicine for oncologic patients.European radiology experimental · 2022Article
- A proposed workflow for proactive virus surveillance and prediction of variants for vaccine design.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Of Screening, Stratification, and Scores.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Responsible Research and Innovation ('RRI') is a cross-cutting priority for scientific research in the European Union and beyond. This paper considers whether the way such research is organised and delivered lends itself to the aims of RRI. We focus particularly on international consortia, which have emerged as a common model to organise large-scale, multi-disciplinary research in contemporary biomedical science. Typically, these consortia operate through fixed-term contracts, and employ governance frameworks consisting of reasonably standard, modular components such as management committees, advisory boards, and data access committees, to co-ordinate the activities of partner institutions and align them with funding agency priorities. These have advantages for organisation and management of the research, but can actively inhibit researchers seeking to implement RRI activities. Conventional consortia governance structures pose specific problems for meaningful public and participant involvement, data sharing, transparency, and 'legacy' planning to deal with societal commitments that persist beyond the duration of the original project. In particular, the 'upstream' negotiation of contractual terms between funders and the institutions employing researchers can undermine the ability for those researchers to subsequently make decisions about data, or participant remuneration, or indeed what happens to consortia outputs after the project is finished, and can inhibit attempts to make project activities and goals responsive to input from ongoing dialogue with various stakeholders. Having explored these challenges, we make some recommendations for alternative consortia governance structures to better support RRI in future.
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.