↓ Skip to main content

Adapting ethical guidelines for adolescent health research to street-connected children and youth in low- and middle-income countries: a case study from western Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adapting ethical guidelines for adolescent health research to street-connected children and youth in low- and middle-income countries: a case study from western Kenya
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12910-015-0084-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. Embleton, M. A. Ott, J. Wachira, V. Naanyu, A. Kamanda, D. Makori, D. Ayuku, P. Braitstein

Abstract

Street-connected children and youth (SCCY) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have multiple vulnerabilities in relation to participation in research. These require additional considerations that are responsive to their needs and the social, cultural, and economic context, while upholding core ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. The objective of this paper is to describe processes and outcomes of adapting ethical guidelines for SCCY's specific vulnerabilities in LMIC. As part of three interrelated research projects in western Kenya, we created procedures to address SCCY's vulnerabilities related to research participation within the local context. These consisted of identifying ethical considerations and solutions in relation to community engagement, equitable recruitment, informed consent, vulnerability to coercion, and responsibility to report. Substantial community engagement provided input on SCCY's participation in research, recruitment, and consent processes. We designed an assent process to support SCCY to make an informed decision regarding their participation in the research that respected their autonomy and their right to dissent, while safeguarding them in situations where their capacity to make an informed decision was diminished. To address issues related to coercion and access to care, we worked to reduce the unequal power dynamic through street outreach, and provided access to care regardless of research participation. Although a vulnerable population, the specific vulnerabilities of SCCY can to some extent be managed using innovative procedures. Engaging SCCY in ethical research is a matter of justice and will assist in reducing inequities and advancing their health and human dignity.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sudan 1 <1%
Unknown 103 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 16%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 33 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 18 17%
Social Sciences 16 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 38 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 January 2019.
All research outputs
#7,508,670
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#622
of 994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,367
of 388,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#14
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 388,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.