A scoping review of the landscape of ethics review processes during public health emergencies in sub-Saharan Africa

Author:

Orievulu Kingsley1,Hinga Alex2,Nkosi Busi1,Ngwenya Nothando1,Seeley Janet3,Gerald Anthony4,Tindana Paulina4,Molyneux Sassy2,Kinyanjui Samson2,Kamuya Dorcas2

Affiliation:

1. Africa Health Research Institute, KwaZulu-Natal

2. KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme

3. London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine

4. University of Ghana

Abstract

Abstract Background: The COVID-19 pandemic forced governments, multilateral public health organisations and (academic) research institutions to undertake research quickly to inform their responses to the pandemic. Most COVID-19-related studies required swift ethical approval, creating ethical and practical challenges for both regulatory authorities and researchers. In this paper, we look at the landscape of ethics review processes in Africa during the public health emergencies (PHEs). Methods: We searched four electronic databases (Web of Science, PUBMED, MEDLINE Complete, and CINAHL) to identify articles describing ethics review processes during public health emergencies and/or pandemics. We reviewed the retrieved articles, excluding articles that were not focused on Africa. We charted the data from the retrieved articles including the authors and year of publication, title, country and disease(s) reference, broad areas of (ethical) consideration, paper type, and approach. Results: Of an initial 4536 entries, we screened the titles and abstracts of 1491 articles, and identified 72 articles for full review. Nine articles were selected for inclusion. Of these nine articles, five referenced West African countries such as Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone and experiences linked to the Ebola virus disease. Two articles were centred on South Africa and Kenya, while the other two articles referenced Africa within more general discussions on experiences and pitfalls of ethics review during PHEs. We found that very few articles captured, or reported on, ethics review processes in Africa (including before the emergence of COVID-19). Guidelines on protocol review and approval processes for PHE were more frequently discussed after the 2014 Ebola outbreak, but these did not focus on Africa specifically. Conclusions: There is a gap in the literature about ethics review processes and preparedness within Africa during PHEs. This paper underscores the importance of these processes to inform practices that facilitate timely, context-relevant research that adequately recognises and reinforces human dignity within the quest to advance scientific knowledge about diseases.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3