Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26042864›Full record

ArticleHealth security

Information security for compliance with select agent regulations.

Nick Lewis, Mark J Campbell, Carole R Baskin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health security. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Nick Lewis
Mark J Campbell
Carole R Baskin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The past decade has seen a significant rise in research on high-consequence human and animal pathogens, many now known as "select agents." While physical security around these agents is tightly regulated, information security standards are still lagging. The understanding of the threats unique to the academic and research environment is still evolving, in part due to poor communication between the various stakeholders. Perhaps as a result, information security guidelines published by select agent regulators lack the critical details and directives needed to achieve even the lowest security level of the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA). While only government agencies are currently required to abide by the provisions of FISMA (unless specified as preconditions for obtaining government grants or contracts--still a relatively rare or narrowly scoped occurrence), the same strategies were recently recommended by executive order for others. We propose that information security guidelines for select agent research be updated to promulgate and detail FISMA standards and processes and that the latter be ultimately incorporated into select agent regulations. We also suggest that information security in academic and research institutions would greatly benefit from active efforts to improve communication among the biosecurity, security, and information technology communities, and from a secure venue for exchange of timely information on emerging threats and solutions in the research environment.

Indexed as

Academies and InstitutesCommunicable DiseasesUniversitiesAnimalsBiomedical ResearchComputer SecurityGuidelines as TopicHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26042864
PMCPMC4486445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.