ArticlePLoS biology2013
Biosafety data as confidential business information.
Article in PLoS biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Introduction of Thousands of Tonnes of Glyphosate in the food Chain-An Evaluation of Glyphosate Tolerant Soybeans.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Cornell Alliance for Science Evaluation of Consensus on Genetically Modified Food Safety: Weaknesses in Study Design.Frontiers in public health · 2017Article
- Levels of DNA methylation and transcript accumulation in leaves of transgenic maize varieties.Environmental sciences Europe · 2016Article
- Conflict of interests and evidence base for GM crops food/feed safety research.Nature biotechnology · 2015Article
- Effect of stacking insecticidal cry and herbicide tolerance epsps transgenes on transgenic maize proteome.BMC plant biology · 2014Article
- Conflicts of interests, confidentiality and censorship in health risk assessment: the example of an herbicide and a GMO.Environmental sciences Europe · 2014Article
- Comparative proteomic analysis of genetically modified maize grown under different agroecosystems conditions in Brazil.Proteome science · 2013Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Removal of confidentiality claims on biosafety data is necessary to adhere to standard scientific procedures of quality assurance, to increase transparency, to minimize impacts of conflicts of interests, and ultimately to improve public confidence in GMOs.
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.