SynthesisBMC medical ethics2021
Equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics.
Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying the motivators, benefits and barriers to sharing participant-level data and samples: results from an international online survey of acute febrile illness cohort teams.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Connecting biospecimens and data: a scoping review-informed conceptual framework for digital infrastructure in biobanking and genomic research in low- and middle-income countries.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Methods for safely sharing dual-use genetic data.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- How to conduct an individual participant data meta-analysis in response to an emerging pathogen: Lessons learned from Zika and COVID-19.Research synthesis methods · 2026Review
- Balancing protection of participants and other stakeholders with openness: African lessons from the MADIVA data sharing and access policy.Global health action · 2025Article
- Reimagining Tuberculosis Control in the Era of Genomics: The Case for Global Investment inPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Insights from ARCOS-V's Transition to Remote Data Collection during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Descriptive Study.Neuroepidemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- The Fragility of Scientific Rigour and Integrity in "Sped up Science": Research Misconduct, Bias, and Hype and in the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2023Article
- Data Sharing During Pandemics: Reciprocity, Solidarity, and Limits to Obligations.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2023Article
- FAIR, ethical, and coordinated data sharing for COVID-19 response: a scoping review and cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 data sharing platforms and registries.The Lancet. Digital health · 2023Article
- Evolutionary changes in the number of dissociable amino acids on spike proteins and nucleoproteins of SARS-CoV-2 variants.Virus evolution · 2023Article
- Equitable Design and Use of Digital Surveillance Technologies During COVID-19: Norms and Concerns.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2022Article
- Jordanian views regarding sharing of medical data for research: A cross-sectional study during COVID-19 pandemic.PloS one · 2022Observational
- Editorial: COVID-19 pandemics: Ethical, legal and social issues.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRapid data sharing can maximize the utility of data. In epidemics and pandemics like Zika, Ebola, and COVID-19, the case for such practices seems especially urgent and warranted. Yet rapidly sharing data widely has previously generated significant concerns related to equity. The continued lack of understanding and guidance on equitable data sharing raises the following questions: Should data sharing in epidemics and pandemics primarily advance utility, or should it advance equity as well? If so, what norms comprise equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics? Do these norms address the equity-related concerns raised by researchers, data providers, and other stakeholders? What tensions must be balanced between equity and other values?
methodsTo explore these questions, we undertook a systematic scoping review of the literature on data sharing in epidemics and pandemics and thematically analyzed identified literature for its discussion of ethical values, norms, concerns, and tensions, with a particular (but not exclusive) emphasis on equity. We wanted to both understand how equity in data sharing is being conceptualized and draw out other important values and norms for data sharing in epidemics and pandemics.
resultsWe found that values of utility, equity, solidarity, and reciprocity were described, and we report their associated norms, including researcher recognition; rapid, real-time sharing; capacity development; and fair benefits to data generators, data providers, and source countries. The value of utility and its associated norms were discussed substantially more than others. Tensions between utility norms (e.g., rapid, real-time sharing) and equity norms (e.g., researcher recognition, equitable access) were raised.
conclusionsThis study found support for equity being advanced by data sharing in epidemics and pandemics. However, norms for equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics require further development, particularly in relation to power sharing and participatory approaches prioritizing inclusion. Addressing structural inequities in the wider global health landscape is also needed to achieve equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics.
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.