Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25227471›Full record

ArticlemBio2014

An epistemological perspective on the value of gain-of-function experiments involving pathogens with pandemic potential.

Arturo Casadevall, Don Howard, Michael J Imperiale

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in mBio, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Biosafety, biosecurity, and bioethics.Monash bioethics review · 2024
    Review
  2. Grand challenge in biosafety and biosecurity.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Why Do Exceptionally Dangerous Gain-of-Function Experiments in Influenza?Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2018
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Gain-of-Function Research: Ethical Analysis.Science and engineering ethics · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Gain-of-function experiments: time for a real debate.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2015
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Arturo CasadevallDepartment of Microbiology & Immunology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA casadeva@aecom.yu.edu.
Don HowardDepartment of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
Michael J ImperialeDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic StudiesPandemicsHumansInfluenza, HumanKnowledgeVaccination

Identifiers

PMID25227471
PMCPMC4172079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.