ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026
Strengthening an Ethical Framework and Research Practice to Better Link Global Health Research to Health Equity : A Case Study of the SPOT-Impact Consortium.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An ethical framework titled "Research for Health Justice" has been developed that provides global health researchers with guidance on how to design their research to promote health equity and global justice. This study sought to test the framework's guidance by comparing it to the governance and experiences of the "Severe Pre-eclampsia adverse Outcome Triage" (SPOT)-Impact consortium-a transdisciplinary maternal health research consortium. The aim was to identify ways in which the "Research for Health Justice" framework could learn from the consortium's insights and practices and to identify how the SPOT-Impact consortium could more systematically link its governance and research to health equity. We conducted in-depth interviews with investigators, held a validation/reflection session with the consortium, and read core consortium documents. Our analysis identified areas of alignment, where the consortium's practices strongly aligned with the framework's guidance, and we describe how that alignment was achieved. We also identified areas of non-alignment, where the consortium's governance or practices diverged from the framework's guidance or where interviewees defined ethical concepts such that they differed from those of the framework. Based on our findings, we suggest several directions for the revision and expansion of the framework as well as lessons for the SPOT-Impact consortium regarding inclusive priority-setting, sharing resources, and research capacity strengthening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42189403What 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.