ArticleBMC medical ethics2026
The ethics of research involving biobanking specimens from Kenyan children and adolescents living with HIV: discrepancies between individual perceptions and policy considerations.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionBiobanking is common in research involving young people living with HIV (YPLHIV). The ethics and policies guiding this practice require careful consideration, especially given the population’s multiple vulnerabilities, like age, HIV status, and limited resources. We examined how well the perspectives of YPLHIV and other stakeholders are reflected in current policies in sub-Saharan Africa, aiming to inform more ethically grounded policy development for specimen biobanking.
methodsWe conducted a review of biobanking-related policy documents from sub-Saharan Africa, primarily from the East African region, and compared them to qualitative findings from interviews with YPLHIV in western Kenya, their caregivers, and subject matter experts (SMEs) regarding perspectives on biobanking. We synthesized the policy and interview data to identify key similarities, differences, and gaps. Themes were organized into three main categories related to biospecimens: (1) collection and analysis, (2) storage and identification, and (3) testing and sharing.
resultsInterviews were conducted with 99 participants – 40 YPLHIV, 20 caregivers, and 39 SMEs (community leaders, healthcare providers, clinical researchers, social scientists, international research experts, and laboratory experts). Participants across all groups stressed the importance of informed consent, results dissemination, confidentiality, transparency, and secure storage. Additional themes included concerns about long-term storage, unauthorized use, sharing with ill-intentioned individuals, requests for participant benefits, expressions of trust in researchers, and disagreement over using identifiers in biospecimen labeling. Interview themes were reflected to varying degrees in policy documents. Our policy search revealed articles from 12 countries, published between 2004 and 2023. All countries addressed consent and confidentiality (n = 12) and most covered results dissemination (n = 11) and biospecimen sharing (n = 9); fewer addressed participant benefits (n = 4), labeling (n = 4), and direct guidance on use, location, and duration of storage (n = 4). Some gaps between stakeholder views and existing policies were evident.
conclusionPerceptions of research involving biobanking among African YPLHIV were mixed, revealing inconsistencies in participants’ responses, and highlighting gaps between these perceptions and existing policies, which were often limited, outdated, and incomprehensive. Findings highlight the need for clear, timely and inclusive policy updates that reflect stakeholder input, particularly as research involving this vulnerable population continues.
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.