Global health reciprocal innovation: ethical, legal and regulatory considerations.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BMJ Global Health Pub Date : 2024-05-30 DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014693
Annette Rid, Bernardo Aguilera, Chikosa Banda, Rao Divi, Matthew Harris, Amanda Kim, Miguel Ossandon, John Zervos, Virginia Rowthorn
{"title":"Global health reciprocal innovation: ethical, legal and regulatory considerations.","authors":"Annette Rid, Bernardo Aguilera, Chikosa Banda, Rao Divi, Matthew Harris, Amanda Kim, Miguel Ossandon, John Zervos, Virginia Rowthorn","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Global health reciprocal innovation (GHRI) is a recent and more formalised approach to conducting research that recognises and develops innovations (eg, medicines, devices, methodologies) from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). At present, studies using GHRI most commonly adapt innovations from LMICs for use in high-income countries (HICs), although some develop innovations in LMICs and HICs. In this paper, we propose that GHRI implicitly makes two ethical commitments: (1) to promote health innovations from LMICs, especially in HICs, and (2) to conduct studies on health innovations from LMICs in equitable partnerships between investigators in LMICs and HICs. We argue that these commitments take a significant step towards a more equal global health research enterprise while helping to ensure that populations and investigators in LMICs receive equitable benefits from studies using GHRI. However, studies using GHRI can raise potential ethical concerns and face legal and regulatory barriers. We propose ethical, legal and regulatory considerations to help address these concerns and barriers. We hope our recommendations will allow GHRI to move the global health research enterprise forward into an era where all people are treated equally as knowers and learners, while populations in both LMICs and HICs benefit equitably from studies using GHRI.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11144796/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014693","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Global health reciprocal innovation (GHRI) is a recent and more formalised approach to conducting research that recognises and develops innovations (eg, medicines, devices, methodologies) from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). At present, studies using GHRI most commonly adapt innovations from LMICs for use in high-income countries (HICs), although some develop innovations in LMICs and HICs. In this paper, we propose that GHRI implicitly makes two ethical commitments: (1) to promote health innovations from LMICs, especially in HICs, and (2) to conduct studies on health innovations from LMICs in equitable partnerships between investigators in LMICs and HICs. We argue that these commitments take a significant step towards a more equal global health research enterprise while helping to ensure that populations and investigators in LMICs receive equitable benefits from studies using GHRI. However, studies using GHRI can raise potential ethical concerns and face legal and regulatory barriers. We propose ethical, legal and regulatory considerations to help address these concerns and barriers. We hope our recommendations will allow GHRI to move the global health research enterprise forward into an era where all people are treated equally as knowers and learners, while populations in both LMICs and HICs benefit equitably from studies using GHRI.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全球卫生互惠创新:伦理、法律和监管方面的考虑。
全球健康互惠创新(GHRI)是一种最新的、更加正规化的研究方法,它承认并发展来自低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)的创新(如药物、设备、方法)。目前,使用 GHRI 的研究最常见的是将中低收入国家的创新成果应用于高收入国家,但也有一些研究在中低收入国家和高收入国家开发创新成果。在本文中,我们提出全球健康HRI 暗含了两个道德承诺:(1)推广来自低收入国家的卫生创新,尤其是在高收入国家;(2)在低收入国家和高收入国家的研究人员之间建立公平的伙伴关系,对来自低收入国家的卫生创新进行研究。我们认为,这些承诺朝着更加平等的全球健康研究事业迈出了重要一步,同时有助于确保低收入国家的人口和研究人员从使用全球健康HRI 的研究中获得公平的利益。然而,使用全球健康HRI 的研究可能会引发潜在的伦理问题,并面临法律和监管障碍。我们提出了伦理、法律和监管方面的考虑因素,以帮助解决这些问题和障碍。我们希望我们的建议能让全球健康HRI 推动全球健康研究事业进入这样一个时代:所有人作为知识者和学习者都得到平等对待,同时低收入、中等收入国家和低收入国家的人口都能从使用全球健康HRI 的研究中公平获益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
期刊最新文献
The impact of a multi-faceted intervention on non-prescription dispensing of antibiotics by urban community pharmacies in Indonesia: a mixed methods evaluation. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH): the evolution of a global health and development sector. Cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and critical analysis of recent evidence. Learning from the Montreal Protocol to improve the global governance of antimicrobial resistance. Leveraging investments, promoting transparency and mobilising communities: a qualitative analysis of news articles about how the Ebola outbreak informed COVID-19 response in five African countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1