Selormey Pamela Emefa, Tsey Irene H, Ganle John, Akweongo Patricia, Tindana Paulina
Department of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Accra, Ghana.
BMC Med Ethics. 2025 Jul 3;26(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s12910-025-01238-w.
Globally, researchers are struggling to implement benefit-sharing plans in genomics research and biobanking. In the African context, there are currently limited benefit-sharing frameworks to guide researchers, and some often rely on personal relationships and judgments in making decisions. Consequently, there have been calls for the development of contextually and culturally relevant benefit-sharing frameworks for pathogenic research and biobanking in Africa. This study responds to that call by using a deliberative experts approach to propose and develop a benefit-sharing framework for pathogen genomic research and biobanking.
Data were collected through deliberative expert key informant interviews. A total of 25 participants, comprising genomics researchers, policymakers, Nagoya Protocol Focal persons, members of institutional review boards, Sponsors and Experts in the field of genomics and biobanking were purposively sampled from 12 countries. Open-ended topic guides were designed and used to facilitate the interviews. The interviews explored issues such as the need for a benefit-sharing framework, the principles underpinning the practice of benefit-sharing, and key features of a possible benefit-sharing framework. Interviews were conducted in English, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Transcripts were imported into Nvivo 14 software, coded and analysed using the framework approach for qualitative data analysis.
The participants reported on the key issues to consider in the development of a benefit-sharing framework. These included motivations for sharing benefits, key elements of a benefit-sharing framework and suggestions for monitoring the implementation of the framework. Based on these expert responses, we proposed and developed a three-phase framework. The first phase presents the contextual benefit-sharing process, which includes the benefit-sharing process, iterative benefit-sharing cycles and post-benefit-sharing responsibilities. The second phase comprises the implementation phase with templates on a step-by-step approach to achieving the three areas in phase 1 and the third concentrates on workplans to accommodate future emerging issues such as designing strategies to map out best practices on benefit-sharing, making efforts to publish the selected strategy and implementing the selected benefit-sharing.
The deliberative approach used in this study allowed for not only contextually and culturally relevant factors to be identified but also enabled reflexive decision-making. The framework developed has the potential to provide practical guidance to pathogen genomic stakeholders in the identification and implementation of benefit-sharing opportunities in their research programmes. More empirical studies are however required to test and evaluate the framework.
Not applicable.
在全球范围内,研究人员在基因组学研究和生物样本库中实施利益分享计划时面临困难。在非洲,目前指导研究人员的利益分享框架有限,一些人在做决策时往往依赖个人关系和判断。因此,有人呼吁为非洲的病原研究和生物样本库制定符合当地情况和文化的利益分享框架。本研究通过采用专家审议方法,回应这一呼吁,提出并制定病原基因组研究和生物样本库的利益分享框架。
通过专家审议关键信息人访谈收集数据。从12个国家有目的地抽取了25名参与者,包括基因组学研究人员、政策制定者、《名古屋议定书》协调人、机构审查委员会成员、资助者以及基因组学和生物样本库领域的专家。设计并使用开放式主题指南来促进访谈。访谈探讨了诸如利益分享框架的必要性、利益分享实践的基本原则以及可能的利益分享框架的关键特征等问题。访谈用英语进行,录音并转录。转录本被导入Nvivo 14软件,使用定性数据分析的框架方法进行编码和分析。
参与者报告了在制定利益分享框架时需要考虑的关键问题。这些问题包括分享利益的动机、利益分享框架的关键要素以及监测框架实施情况的建议。基于这些专家的回应,我们提出并制定了一个三阶段框架。第一阶段展示情境利益分享过程,包括利益分享过程、迭代利益分享周期和利益分享后的责任。第二阶段包括实施阶段,有逐步实现第一阶段三个领域的模板,第三阶段集中在工作计划上,以适应未来出现的新问题,如设计绘制利益分享最佳实践的策略、努力发表选定的策略以及实施选定的利益分享。
本研究中使用的审议方法不仅能够识别与当地情况和文化相关的因素,还能实现反思性决策。所制定的框架有可能为病原基因组利益相关者在其研究项目中识别和实施利益分享机会提供实际指导。然而,需要更多的实证研究来测试和评估该框架。
不适用。