Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39407232›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2024

Data protection legislation in Africa and pathways for enhancing compliance in big data health research.

Nchangwi Syntia Munung, Ciara Staunton, Otshepeng Mazibuko, P J Wall, Ambroise Wonkam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Harnessing multilingual AI triage to relieve Africa's strained health systems.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

5 authors.

Nchangwi Syntia MunungDivision of Human Genetics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. nchangwisyntia@yahoo.com.
Ciara StauntonInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Bolzano, Italy.
Otshepeng MazibukoDivision of Human Genetics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
P J WallADAPT Centre Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Ambroise WonkamDivision of Human Genetics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. awonkam1@jhmi.edu.

Funding

Public Understanding of Big data in Genomics Medicine in Africa (PUBGEM-Africa)U01MH127692 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN · PI MUNUNG, NCHANGWI SYNTIA, WONKAM, AMBROISE · 2021 to 2025
$1.9M
DS-I Africa - LAWU01MH127690 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL · PI THALDAR, DONRICH WILLEM · 2021 to 2023
$1.2M
NIH HHS U01MH127690NIH HHS U01MH127692NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH127690NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH127692
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing availability of large volumes of personal data from diverse sources such as electronic health records, research programmes, commercial genetic testing, national health surveys and wearable devices presents significant opportunities for advancing public health, disease surveillance, personalized medicine and scientific research and innovation. However, this potential is hampered by a lack of clarity related to the processing and sharing of personal health data, particularly across varying national regulatory frameworks. This often leaves researcher stakeholders uncertain about how to navigate issues around secondary data use, repurposing data for different research objectives and cross-border data sharing.

methodWe analysed 37 data protection legislation across Africa to identify key principles and requirements for processing and sharing of personal health and genetic data in scientific research. On the basis of this analysis, we propose strategies that data science research initiatives in Africa can implement to ensure compliance with data protection laws while effectively reusing and sharing personal data for health research and scientific innovation.

resultsIn many African countries, health and genetic data are categorized as sensitive and subject to stricter protection. Key principles guiding the processing of personal data include confidentiality, non-discrimination, transparency, storage limitation, legitimacy, purpose specification, integrity, fairness, non-excessiveness, accountability and data minimality. The rights of data subjects include the right to be informed, the right of access, the right to rectification, the right to erasure/deletion of data, the right to restrict processing, the right to data portability and the right to seek compensation. Consent and adequacy assessments were the most common legal grounds for cross-border data transfers. However, considerable variation exists in legal requirements for data transfer across countries, potentially creating barriers to collaborative health research across Africa.

conclusionsWe propose several strategies that data science research initiatives can adopt to align with data protection laws. These include developing a standardized module for safe data flows, using trusted data environments to minimize cross-border transfers, implementing dynamic consent mechanisms to comply with consent specificity and data subject rights and establishing codes of conduct to govern the secondary use of personal data for health research and innovation.

Indexed as

Big DataComputer SecurityConfidentialityInformation DisseminationAfricaBiomedical ResearchData ScienceElectronic Health RecordsHumansBig dataData governanceData lawsData sharingDynamic consentSafe data flows

Identifiers

PMID39407232
PMCPMC11479556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.