Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40110426›Full record

ArticleJournal of law and the biosciences

Cross-border data sharing for research in Africa: an analysis of the data protection and research ethics requirements in 12 jurisdictions.

Ciara Staunton, Aliki Edgcumbe, Lukman Abdulrauf, Amy Gooden, Paul Ogendi, Donrich Thaldar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of law and the biosciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The Case for Genomic Surveillance in Africa.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ciara StauntonInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Bolzano, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3185-440X
Aliki EdgcumbeSchool of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9771-459X
Lukman AbdulraufSchool of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Amy GoodenSchool of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Paul OgendiSchool of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Donrich ThaldarSchool of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7346-3490

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In recent years, there has been a notable uptake in genomic and health-related research activities across the African continent. Similarly, there has been increased introduction of data protection legislation that affects the sharing of personal data, such as health data and genomic data, including for research. Many of these statutes have stricter requirements when sharing personal data across borders. Consequently, the cross-border sharing of health data, that includes genetic data, requires careful navigation of the pertinent data protection legislation, in particular concerning the sharing of such data for research purposes. To help researchers navigate these legal frameworks, 12 African countries were analysed to develop country guides on cross-border data sharing. Results: Of the 12 African countries that were analysed, 10 have data protection laws in place (Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zimbabwe), while two countries (Cameroon and The Gambia) do not. (At the time of the study, Cameroon did not have a data protection regulation in place. Law No. 2024/017 on the Protection of Personal Data is now in force.) With the exception of Ghana, all countries with data protection statutes had additional requirements to be met when sharing personal data across borders. Consent and adequacy are the most common grounds for justifying the sharing of personal data across borders. Conclusion: Given the limitations of the current models of consent, consent is not a suitable basis to transfer large quantities of data for research. Adequacy is a common ground, but there are national differences in the implementation of this ground. Researchers must therefore analyse each national legal framework and make decisions on a case-by-case and country-by-country basis.

Indexed as

adequacyconsentdata governancedata protectiondata sharingethicsprivacy

Identifiers

PMID40110426
PMCPMC11921095

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.