Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40642291›Full record

ArticleIBRO neuroscience reports2025

Charting neuroethics discourse in Africa: A scoping review of ethical issues of neuroscience research in Africa.

Oluyinka Oyeniji, Kutoma Wakunuma, Adebowale Owoseni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IBRO neuroscience reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Oluyinka OyenijiCenter for Computing and Social Responsibility, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Kutoma WakunumaCenter for Computing and Social Responsibility, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Adebowale OwoseniCenter for Computing and Social Responsibility, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global neuroethics discourse has gained prominence since the beginning of the 21st century. Perspectives on neuroethics have been drawn from USA, Asia, the European Union etc. In Africa, the discourse has been largely influenced by neurogenomics research and collaborations across countries in the region. As neuroethicists continue to propose considerations for framing neuroethics discourse in Africa, ethical issues arise from not only largescale neurogenomics research, but such other neuroscience and brain research projects conducted in heterogeneous societies on the continent. Such neuroscience research projects carried out in academic institutions and medical facilities are yet to be subjected to an investigation of ethical issues arising therefrom. This paper therefore took a departure from neuroethics discourse being shaped in neurogenomics and international collaborations to consider what ethical issues arise from neuroscience broadly across parts of Africa. We conducted a scoping review of neuroscience research and neuroethics publications, complemented by the snowballing method to investigate ethical issues arising from such research endeavors. The research was grounded in ubuntu principles as lens through which ethical, legal and social implications of African neuroscience research were viewed. Findings established ethical issues peculiar within the African neuroscience research context including inequitable access to neuroscience research, distrust, lack of research funding, imposition of foreign methods without standardisation within contexts, violence and use of restraints, threat to life and morbidity, etc as ethical issues of neuroscience in Africa.

Indexed as

AfricaBrain researchEthical challengesNeuroethicsNeuroscience

Identifiers

PMID40642291
PMCPMC12242004

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.