Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40682008›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical ethics2025

Informed consent in genetic and genomic studies in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of bioethical issues.

Yunqi Li, Deborah J Bowen, Joon-Ho Yu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2025. 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. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Yunqi LiInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. yunqili@usc.edu.
Deborah J BowenInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Joon-Ho YuInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternational collaboration on genetic/genomic studies has expanded dramatically. Informed consent remains a cornerstone for protecting participant autonomy. Over the past few decades, guidelines, recommendations, and theoretical discussions have been published on the informed consent process in cross-cultural contexts, particularly in Africa. These resources suggest best practices-ranging from assessing participant comprehension to engaging local communities. However, it remains unclear how well the current practices address the full range of informed consent challenges encountered by the stakeholders.

methodsWe performed a systematic literature review of empirical studies that explored stakeholders' perspectives, primarily research participants and researchers, on informed consent in the context of international genetic/genomic research in countries of Africa. We followed the PRISMA guideline and used thematic analysis for data synthesis and analysis.

resultsTwenty-four relevant articles were identified and reviewed for five bioethical issues: (1) comprehension of consent information, (2) voluntary participation, (3) consent elements, (4) consent model, and (5) community engagement. Different levels of understanding and recall over different consent elements, and multiple factors associated with comprehension were observed. Voluntary participation could be influenced by misconception, monetary and healthcare compensation, and previously established trust with the research team. Many participants show less interest in certain consent elements, such as biobanking, data sharing, and future use, but more in the section on benefits. Returning results had potential advantages in building trust between participants and the research team; however, the most appropriate way to return results is under discussion. There was also conversation over consent models (broad, tired, and dynamic) on their balance between autonomy and practicality. Finally, many articles ascertained the value of community engagement and encouraged researchers to consider local cultural beliefs, social stigma, and decision-making habits when designing the consent process.

conclusionWe observed an increased interest in the ethical conduct of the informed consent process under international genetics/genomics studies in recent decades. Awareness and attention to these issues are needed to develop more appropriate consent strategies that could further safeguard the rights and welfare of local participants and support the smooth conduct of research.

Indexed as

Bioethical IssuesGenetic ResearchGenomicsInformed ConsentAfrica South of the SaharaComprehensionHumansPersonal AutonomyResearch SubjectsEthicsGenetics and genomics researchInformed consentSub Saharan-Africa

Identifiers

PMID40682008
PMCPMC12275316

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.