Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42040776›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026

Regulatory provisions for post-release monitoring of genetically modified organisms in Africa.

Julia Njagi, John Muriuki, Paul Mbugua, Brinda Dass, Stephanie James, Dorington Ogoyi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Julia NjagiBiosafety Licensing, Monitoring and Surveillance, National Biosafety Authority, Nairobi, Kenya.
John MuriukiDepartment of Environmental Science and Education, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya.
Paul MbuguaDepartment of Plant Sciences, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya.
Brinda DassGeneConvene Global Collaborative, Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), North Bethesda, MD, United States.
Stephanie JamesGeneConvene Global Collaborative, Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), North Bethesda, MD, United States.
Dorington OgoyiDepartment of Biological and Life Sciences, Technical University of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation INV-008525
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetically modified (GM) crops with improved traits such as resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses and enhanced nutritional profiles have been commercially cultivated for over three decades. Despite extensive safety data and long-term cultivation experience, concerns continue to be raised about the potential risks and benefits of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This is particularly true for the African region, where only eight out of fifty-four countries have so far commercialized GMOs. Upon release into the environment, GM crops may interact with ecosystems in complex ways, possibly leading to unanticipated ecological effects. Consequently, post-release monitoring of GMOs is essential to identify early signs of adverse impacts, enabling timely responses such as adjustments in risk management strategies, mitigation measures, or re-evaluation of previous regulatory decisions. A supportive policy and regulatory environment are critical for facilitating the safe development, testing, and commercialization of GMOs. This study conducted a desktop review of post-release monitoring frameworks for GMOs in selected African countries, as well as interviews with key informants in countries that have commercialized at least one GMO product. The findings reveal that most sampled countries lack clearly defined environmental protection goals and specific provisions regarding the scope and duration of post-release monitoring of GMOs. Where the duration of monitoring is prescribed, it is a blanket cover for all GMOs regardless of their life cycles. Moreover, the responsibility for monitoring is often delegated entirely to the applicant, and where local institutions are involved, there is no clear coordination mechanism for data sharing. These findings underscore the need for case-by-case monitoring approaches, guided by clearly articulated national protection goals and clear roles and coordination among stakeholders to ensure the safe and responsible deployment of GMOs.

Indexed as

commercializationenvironmental protection goalsGMOspost-release monitoringregulatory frameworks

Identifiers

PMID42040776
PMCPMC13106491

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.