ArticleGlobal public health2025
Perpetuating global inequalities in the knowledge economy: The case of HIV social science research in East Africa.
Article in Global public health, 2025. 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.
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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Despite almost a century's research capacity strengthening in Africa, HIV/AIDS research has been dominated by high-income countries (HICs), illustrating broader inequalities in the global knowledge economy. The perpetuation of weak social science capacity in east Africa is analysed as part of a complex system with multiple causes at different socio-ecological levels. Furthermore, although primarily driven by HIC/ neo-colonialist interests, causes also stem from low-income countries (LICs), and individual actions reproduce macro-level structures. Most factors link to global economic inequalities, and the extraction of data and intellectual capacity from east Africa operates akin to Dependency Theory, but this is exacerbated by African governments. At the meso-level, HIC institutions prioritise revenue and publications over strengthening LIC research capacity, whatever their rhetoric, while serious impediments exist in east African institutions. At the micro-level, HIC researchers perpetuate inequalities through, e.g., prioritising output, maintaining dependency, and choosing HIC rather than LIC conferences and journals. Multiple responses are needed, particularly at the macro-level, especially long-term, tailored funding. Meso-level responses include meritocratic career structures and institutional research consultancies. Individual HIC researchers should, ideally, prioritise training and mentoring, but this risks career advancement. Above all, honesty is required about motives and conflicting interests, at institutional and individual levels.
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.