Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36410802›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Strengthening ethics committees for health-related research in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Iqra Chaudhry, Val Thurtle, Edward Foday, Andrew J M Leather, Mohamed Samai, Haja Wurie, Divya Parmar

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Digital platforms for ethics review: a mini review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Health Research Ethics in Southern Africa: Building Capacity and Cultivating Excellence.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Iqra ChaudhryDepartment of Population Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Val ThurtleKing's Centre for Global Health and Health Partnerships, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Edward FodaySierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee, Directorate of Training and Research, Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Andrew J M LeatherKing's Centre for Global Health and Health Partnerships, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Mohamed SamaiCollege of Medicine and Allied Health Sciences, University of Sierra Leone, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Haja WurieCollege of Medicine and Allied Health Sciences, University of Sierra Leone, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Divya ParmarDepartment of Population Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, King's College London, London, UK divya.parmar@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7979-3140
King's College London · GBUniversity of Sierra Leone · SL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHealth-related research in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has grown over the years. However, concerns have been raised about the state of research ethics committees (RECs). This scoping review examines the literature on RECs for health-related research in SSA and identifies strategies that have been applied to strengthen the RECs. It focuses on three aspects of RECs: regulatory governance and leadership, administrative and financial capacity and technical capacity of members.

designA scoping review of published literature, including grey literature, was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute approach. DATA SOURCES: BioOne, CINAHL, Embase (via Ovid), Education Abstracts, Global Health, Google Scholar, Jstor, OpenEdition (French), Philosopher's Index, PsycINFO, PubMed, Science Citation and Expanded Index (Web of Science), reference lists of included studies and specific grey literature sources. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included empirical studies on RECs for health-related research in SSA, covering topics on REC leadership and governance, administrative and financial capacity and the technical capacity of REC members. We included studies published between 01 January 2000 and 18 February 2022 and written in English, French, Portuguese or Swahili. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers screened the records. Data were extracted by one reviewer and cross-checked by another. Owing to the heterogeneity of included studies, thematic analysis was used.

resultsWe included 54 studies. The findings show that most RECs in SSA work under significant administrative and financial constraints, with few opportunities for capacity building for committee members. This has an impact on the quality of reviews and the overall performance of RECs. Although most countries have national governance systems for RECs, they lack regulations on accountability, transparency and monitoring of RECs.

conclusionsThis review provides a comprehensive overview of the literature on RECs for health-related research in SSA and contributes to our understanding of how RECs can be strengthened.

Indexed as

Capacity BuildingEthics Committees, ResearchAfrica South of the SaharaDelivery of Health CareGlobal HealthHumansHealth & safetyInternational health servicesMEDICAL ETHICS

Identifiers

PMID36410802
PMCPMC9680187
OpenAlexW4309530658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.