ArticleBMJ open2026
Meanings and practices of solidarity in global health: a qualitative investigation - study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Instituting solidarity: the role of research institutes in advancing global health equity.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Reciprocity in global health: How successes from the global south can inform global health interventions in Canada and the U.S.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSolidarity in global health is often invoked as an ethical imperative to guide responses to global health challenges. Its meanings and practices across diverse contexts, however, remain under-explored. Deepening an understanding of how solidarity is conceptualised, enacted and perceived by a diverse array of actors within the global health ecosystem is crucial to advancing meaningful and measurable application of this commitment in global health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This qualitative study uses interpretive research methodology to explore perspectives on solidarity among key global health stakeholders: community-level leaders in civil society organisations working on global health issues; research institute directors in the Global South; and individuals with experience of funding decision-making with major global health funding and agenda setting organisations ('global health influencers'). Data will be gathered through semi-structured interviews and analysed using inductive and deductive reflexive thematic analysis, to identify patterns and differences in how these global health stakeholders recognise and define solidarity or its absence in their day-to-day work, while remaining attentive to conceptual tensions, participant interpretations of solidarity that may be unfamiliar to our team, and our role as researchers in shaping what we register and emphasise as significant in our reporting of findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Western University Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (HSREB) in Ontario, Canada # 2024-123965-87873 and the Ethics Committee for the Humanities, University of Ghana # ECH 163/23-24 and University of Oxford, Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee (OxTREC) waiver dated 10 April 2024. Study results will be submitted for peer-reviewed publication. Results will also be summarised in an open access report and presented at various stakeholder meetings and in online webinars. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The final protocol was registered with Open Science Framework on 28 October 2023. View only link: https://osf.io/gryp5/?view_only=8baff435a35847f09a342408d38ee35b.
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.