ArticleProgress in neurobiology2013
Ethics in prion disease.
Article in Progress in neurobiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Bioinformatics and System Biology Techniques to Determine Biomolecular Signatures and Pathways of Prion Disorder.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2022Article
- Genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases: Ethical and health communication challenges.Neurobiology of disease · 2020Review
- Article
- Genetic Testing in Prion Disease: Psychological Consequences of the Decisions to Know or Not to Know.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Prion Diseases.Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.) · 2015Review
- Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for inherited neurological disorders.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2014Review
- Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease associated with a V203I homozygous mutation in the prion protein gene.Prion · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This paper is intended to discuss some of the scientific and ethical issues that are created by increased research efforts towards earlier diagnosis, as well as to treatment of, human prion diseases (and related dementias), including the resulting consequences for individuals, their families, and society. Most patients with prion disease currently are diagnosed when they are about 2/3 of the way through their disease course (Geschwind et al., 2010a; Paterson et al., 2012b), when the disease has progressed so far that even treatments that stop the disease process would probably have little benefit. Although there are currently no treatments available for prion diseases, we and others have realized that we must diagnose patients earlier and with greater accuracy so that future treatments have hope of success. As approximately 15% of prion diseases have a autosomal dominant genetic etiology, this further adds to the complexity of ethical issues, particularly regarding when to conduct genetic testing, release of genetic results, and when or if to implement experimental therapies. Human prion diseases are both infectious and transmissible; great care is required to balance the needs of the family and individual with both public health needs and strained hospital budgets. It is essential to proactively examine and address the ethical issues involved, as well as to define and in turn provide best standards of care.
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.