Closing the door on parachutes and parasites

Health, The Lancet Global

doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30239-0

Cited by 160 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Building out American and European parasite collections with globally sourced specimens would only perpetuate existing data gaps and research inefficiencies, and the structural inequities and injustices they reflect. Increasingly, biomedical research is under legitimate scrutiny for parachute research-Western-driven research 'partnerships' that leverage international project design for exploitative and extractive sampling, with little benefit to partners in the Global South [62][63][64]. Though our hypothetical Global Parasite Project would be focused primarily on biodiversity and ecology, rather than biomedical or global health priorities, systematics and conservation are no exception to these conversations.…”

Section: The Case For a Global Parasite Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

What would it take to describe the global diversity of parasites?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How many parasites are there on Earth? Here, we use helminth parasites to highlight how little is known about parasite diversity, and how insufficient our current approach will be to describe the full scope of life on Earth. Using the largest database of host–parasite associations and one of the world’s largest parasite collections, we estimate a global total of roughly 100 000–350 000 species of helminth endoparasites of vertebrates, of which 85–95% are unknown to science. The parasites of amphibians and reptiles remain the most poorly described, but the majority of undescribed species are probably parasites of birds and bony fish. Missing species are disproportionately likely to be smaller parasites of smaller hosts in undersampled countries. At current rates, it would take centuries to comprehensively sample, collect and name vertebrate helminths. While some have suggested that macroecology can work around existing data limitations, we argue that patterns described from a small, biased sample of diversity aren’t necessarily reliable, especially as host–parasite networks are increasingly altered by global change. In the spirit of moonshots like the Human Genome Project and the Global Virome Project, we consider the idea of a Global Parasite Project: a global effort to transform parasitology and inventory parasite diversity at an unprecedented pace.

show abstract

Section: The Case For a Global Parasite Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

What would it take to describe the global diversity of parasites?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most global health research funds are spent in HICs,6 and HIC experts dominate advisory boards of major funders and global health agencies 5. Data show under-representation of LMIC authors on research publications that are about LMICs,7 and parachute research continues to be a persistent concern 8…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global health journals need to address equity, diversity and inclusion

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…13 15 This dynamic can result in both 'parachute' and 'parasitic' research in international collaborations, where Northern researchers drop into Southern settings to undertake research without equitable treatment of Southern partners. 35 Our experience from the current study shows that there are potentially real logistical issues in international collaborative research, but that each partner can bring unique qualities, making the research efforts stronger. It was clear that the role of the Brazilian academics was critical, as it was 'their' epidemic in 'their' setting.…”

Section: Bmj Global Healthmentioning

confidence: 83%

The promise and pitfalls of social science research in an emergency: lessons from studying the Zika epidemic in Brazil, 2015–2016

Passos¹,

Matta

Lyra

et al. 2020

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social science generates evidence necessary to control epidemics. It can help to craft appropriate public health responses, develop solutions to the epidemic impacts and improve understanding of why the epidemic occurred. Yet, there are practical constraints in undertaking this international research in a way that produces quality, ethical and appropriate data, and that values all voices and experiences, especially those of local researchers and research participants. In this paper, we reflected on the experience of undertaking social science research during the 2015/2016 Zika epidemic in Brazil. This experience was considered from the perspective of this paper’s authors: three Brazilian academics, two UK academics and two mothers of children affected by congenital Zika syndrome. This group came together through the conduct of the Social and Economic Impact of Zika study, a mixed-methods social science study. The key findings highlight practical issues in the achievement of three goals: the conduct of high-quality social science in emergencies and efforts towards the decolonisation of global health in terms of levelling the power between Brazilian and UK researchers and optimising the role of patients within research. From our perspective, the information collected through social science was valuable, providing detailed insight into the programmatic needs of mothers and their affected children (eg, economic and social support and mental health services). Social science was considered a low priority within the Zika epidemic despite its potential importance. There were logistical challenges in conducting social science research, foremost of which are the difficulties in developing a trusting and balanced power relationship between the UK and Brazilian researchers in a short time frame. When these issues were overcome, each partner brought unique qualities, making the research stronger. The mothers of affected children expressed dissatisfaction with research, as they were involved in many studies which were not coordinated, and from which they did not see a benefit. In conclusion, the importance of social science in epidemics must continue to be promoted by funders. Funders can also set in place mechanisms to help equalise the power dynamics between foreign and local researchers, researchers and participants, both to promote justice and to create best quality data.

show abstract

Closing the door on parachutes and parasites

Cited by 160 publications

References 0 publications

What would it take to describe the global diversity of parasites?

What would it take to describe the global diversity of parasites?

Global health journals need to address equity, diversity and inclusion

The promise and pitfalls of social science research in an emergency: lessons from studying the Zika epidemic in Brazil, 2015–2016

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About