ArticleScience and engineering ethics2015
Biosecurity and Open-Source Biology: The Promise and Peril of Distributed Synthetic Biological Technologies.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- CRISPR-based gene editing for antimicrobial resistance control in human medicine.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- An 8-step procedure-specific risk framework enables reproducible biosafety level assignment beyond agent-based classification.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Building biosecurity for synthetic biology.Molecular systems biology · 2020Article
- Should We All be Scientists? Re-thinking Laboratory Research as a Calling.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
- Ethical and Philosophical Considerations for Gain-of-Function Policy: The Importance of Alternate Experiments.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2018Article
- Article
- DIY Biology - hacking goes viral!Science progress · 2016Article
- The ethics of biosafety considerations in gain-of-function research resulting in the creation of potential pandemic pathogens.Journal of medical ethics · 2015Article
- Mapping the Scientific Mesolevel: Where Are We Aiming?The Hastings Center reportArticle
- The Importance of Biosecurity in Emerging Biotechnologies and Synthetic Biology.Avicenna journal of medical biotechnologyReview
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this article, we raise ethical concerns about the potential misuse of open-source biology (OSB): biological research and development that progresses through an organisational model of radical openness, deskilling, and innovation. We compare this organisational structure to that of the open-source software model, and detail salient ethical implications of this model. We demonstrate that OSB, in virtue of its commitment to openness, may be resistant to governance attempts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25248872What 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.