Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26085441›Full record

ArticleLife sciences, society and policy2014

The role of philosophy of science in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): the case of nanomedicine.

Gry Oftedal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Life sciences, society and policy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Ethical issues in nanomedicine: Tempest in a teapot?Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2017
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. ELSA and RRI--Editorial.Life sciences, society and policy · 2015
    Article
  7. The past and future of RRI.Life sciences, society and policy · 2014
    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

1 author.

Gry OftedalDepartment of Philosophy, Classics, History of Art and Ideas, University of Oslo, Box 1020 Blindern, 0315, Oslo, Norway, gry.oftedal@ifikk.uio.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on ethical, legal and social aspects (ELSA) of life sciences and new technologies has mainly been focused on impacts and consequences, while the emerging framework of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) focuses rather on increased involvement and reflexivity in research processes to foster science and technology that better answers the needs of society. I argue that philosophy of science should be a central feature of RRI and demonstrate how the philosophy of science can contribute in this sense. I show how investigating basic assumptions in research, here exemplified by reductive assumptions in causal modeling, can have important ethical and societal implications.

Identifiers

PMID26085441
PMCPMC4646892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.