ArticleJournal of public health in Africa2026
Ethical approval processes for research during public health emergencies in Africa: Experiences from a multicountry mpox study.
Article in Journal of public health in Africa, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Timely initiation of outbreak research is essential for timely public health action. Yet conventional ethics review timelines, often measured in weeks, can delay study start-up and blunt the impact of interventions. During epidemics, routine review timelines of 2 weeks - 9 weeks delay research and weaken public health responses. Fast-tracking ethical review allows researchers to initiate studies at the height of an outbreak, when data are most relevant and informative. A spike in mpox cases across 20 Member States in 2024 prompted the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) to declare its first Public Health Emergency of Continental Security. To expedite therapeutic trials, develop supporting policies, and mobilise resources for research and response, the Africa CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO) developed the Research and Innovation pillar within the Continental Incident Management Support Team (IMST). Among key research initiatives was a multicountry social and behavioural study led by Africa CDC. This article includes a synthesis based on implementation experiences from a multicountry mpox socio-behavioural study coordinated by the Africa CDC across 10 African countries. Within a month of IMST's inauguration, a master protocol and 10 country-specific protocols were finalised, led by Africa CDC in collaboration with national public health institutes and academic experts. Approval processes took 3 weeks - 11 weeks, with most countries completing review within 4 weeks - 8 weeks. This underscores the need to further streamline the ethical review process during emergencies and to improve efficiency. Contribution: As the global research landscape continues to evolve, there is an urgent need for a unified continental ethical oversight framework to address the historical delays caused by multiple and overlapping requirements.
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.