ArticleBMJ global health2024
Safeguarding in practice: anticipating, minimising and mitigating risk in teenage pregnancy research in urban informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya.
Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Safeguarding challenges in global health research include sexual abuse and exploitation, physical and psychological abuse, financial exploitation and neglect. Intersecting individual identities (such as gender and age) shape vulnerability to risk. Adolescents, who are widely included in sexual and reproductive health research, may be particularly vulnerable. Sensitive topics like teenage pregnancy may lead to multiple risks. We explored potential safeguarding risks and mitigation strategies when studying teenage pregnancies in informal urban settlements in Nairobi, Kenya. Risk mapping was initiated by the research team that had prolonged engagement with adolescent girls and teen mothers. The team mapped potential safeguarding risks for both research participants and research staff due to, and unrelated to, the research activity. Mitigation measures were agreed for each risk. The draft risk map was validated by community members and coresearchers in a workshop. During implementation, safeguarding risks emerged across the risk map areas and are presented as case studies. Risks to the girls included intimate partner violence because of a phone provided by the study; male participants faced potential disclosure of their perceived criminal activity (impregnating teenage girls); and researchers faced psychological and physical risks due to the nature of the research. These cases shed further light on safeguarding as a key priority area for research ethics and implementation. Our experience illustrates the importance of mapping safeguarding risks and strengthening safeguarding measures throughout the research lifecycle. We recommend co-developing and continuously updating a safeguarding map to enhance safety, equity and trust between the participants, community and researchers.
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.