Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16223207›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2005

An ethical framework for stem cell research in the European Union.

John Harris, Lisa Bortolotti, Louise Irving

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. How and Why to Replace the 14-Day Rule.Current stem cell reports · 2018
    Review
  2. Article
  3. THE POLITICS OF RISK AND EU GOVERNANCE OF HUMAN MATERIAL.Maastricht journal of European and comparative law · 2009
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

John HarrisCentre for Social Ethics and Policy, The School of Law, University of Manchester, UK. john.m.harris@manchester.ac.uk
Lisa Bortolotti
Louise Irving
University of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The European Union is a nightmare from the perspective of the ethics and regulation of science. A hitherto insoluble problem has been the task of drafting ethical principles which do not founder on the radically different attitudes taken to the question of the moral status of the human embryo. Following the conclusions reached in an international project, EUROSTEM, we suggest that this problem can be solved by concentration on the scope of principles and we emphasize that European research should be funded in a way that does not discriminate between individual states and researchers in the EU. Finally, we observe that the availability of any eventual embryonic stem cell therapies will pose a dilemma for those countries and those people that have declared stem cell research to be unacceptable.

Indexed as

Ethics, ResearchStem CellsEmbryo ResearchEuropean UnionHuman RightsHumansMoralsStem Cell TransplantationBiomedical and Behavioral ResearchGenetics and Reproduction

Identifiers

PMID16223207
OpenAlexW2095061380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.