ArticleThe Hastings Center report
H5N1 avian flu research and the ethics of knowledge.
Article in The Hastings Center report. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values.AI and ethics · 2026Article
- A call for open science in forensics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Biosafety, biosecurity, and bioethics.Monash bioethics review · 2024Review
- A precautionary approach to autonomous vehicles.AI and ethics · 2024Article
- Article
- Moral Distress in Scientific Research.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2016Article
- Gain-of-Function Research: Ethical Analysis.Science and engineering ethics · 2016Article
- The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible Science.Accountability in research · 2016Article
- Biosecurity Policy in the US: A Critical Assessment.Frontiers in public health · 2014Article
- Dual-use decision making: relational and positional issues.Monash bioethics reviewArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
How can we best address the threat posed by dual-use research? By concentrating on the benefits of the knowledge and publishing it anyway? By keeping some of the research secret from the general public, making it available in full only to responsible scientists? Or by not publishing it -- or, in some cases, not even conducting it at all?
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.