Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38313470›Full record

ArticleWellcome open research2023

Invisibility in global health: A case for disturbing bioethical frameworks.

Arsenii Alenichev, Halina Suwalowska, Marlyn C Faure, Shu Hui Ng, Chelsea Modlin, Ilana Ambrogi, Jonathan D Shaffer, Michael Parker, Patricia Kingori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wellcome open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

9 authors.

Arsenii AlenichevEthox Centre, Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX3 7LF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4099-8955
Halina SuwalowskaEthox Centre, Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX3 7LF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4039-094X
Marlyn C FaureThe Ethics Lab, Department of Medicine and Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, Cape Town, 7935, South Africa.
Shu Hui NgMonash University, Subang Jaya, Selangor, 45700, Malaysia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0439-4903
Chelsea ModlinBerman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA.
Ilana AmbrogiInstitute of Bioethics, Human Rights and Gender (ANIS), Brasilia, 70.094-971, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2886-4284
Jonathan D ShafferDepartment of Sociology, The University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, 05405, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8933-6915
Michael ParkerEthox Centre, Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX3 7LF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7054-4711
Patricia KingoriEthox Centre, Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX3 7LF, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the global health community has increasingly reported the problem of 'invisibility': aspects of health and wellbeing, particularly amongst the world's most marginalized and impoverished people, that are systematically overlooked and ignored by people and institutions in relative positions of power. It is unclear how to realistically manage global health invisibility within bioethics and other social science disciplines and move forward. In this letter, we reflect on several case studies of invisibility experienced by people in Brazil, Malaysia, West Africa and other transnational contexts. Highlighting the complex nature of invisibility and its interconnectedness with social, political and economic issues and trends, we argue that while local and targeted interventions might provide relief and comfort locally, they will not be able to solve the underlying causes of invisibility. Building from the shared lessons of case study presentations at an Oxford-Johns Hopkins Global Infectious Disease Ethics Collaborative (GLIDE), we argue that in dealing with an intersectional issue such as invisibility, twenty-first century global health bioethics could pursue a more 'disturbing' framework, challenging the narrow comforting solutions which take as a given the sociomaterial inequalities of the status quo. We highlight that comforting and disturbing bioethical frameworks should not be considered as opposing sides, but as two approaches working in tandem in order to achieve the internationally set global health milestones of providing better health and wellbeing for everyone. Insights from sociology, anthropology, postcolonial studies, history, feminist studies and other styles of critical reasoning have long been disturbing to grand narratives of people and their conditions. To rediscover the ethos of the WHO Alma Ata Declaration-a vision of "health for all by the year 2000"-these thinking tools will be necessary aids in developing cooperation and support beyond the narrow market logic that dominates the landscape of contemporary global health.

Indexed as

bioethicsdecolonizationglobal healthinequalityinvisibility

Identifiers

PMID38313470
PMCPMC10835101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.