ArticleProtein & cell2015
The moral imperative to continue gene editing research on human embryos.
Article in Protein & cell, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: a systematic review of reasons.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2018Pooled it
- Intergenerational healthcare ethics: considering conceptualizations of generations and their collective and temporal dimensions.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Gene modification: Exploring the potential in treating kidney diseases.Pharmacological research · 2026Review
- Unlocking the potential: advancements and applications of gene therapy in severe disorders.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Ray of Hope for Infertility.ACS omega · 2025Review
- Liquid biopsies for early detection and monitoring of cancer: advances, challenges, and future directions.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Advancing the Battle against Cystic Fibrosis: Stem Cell and Gene Therapy Insights.Current medical science · 2024Review
- Modular Ontologies for Genetically Modified People and their Bioethical Implications.Nanoethics · 2024Article
- [Some present and future ethical dilemmas surrounding advancements in in vitro fertilization.]Salud colectiva · 2023Article
- Mapping the 'Ethical' Controversy of Human Heritable Genome Editing: a Multidisciplinary Approach.Asian bioethics review · 2023Article
- Article
- Affecting future individuals: Why and when germline genome editing entails a greater moral obligation towards progeny.Bioethics · 2021Article
- Review
- Genetics experience impacts attitudes towards germline gene editing: a survey of over 1500 members of the public.Journal of human genetics · 2020Article
- Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Ethics parallel research: an approach for (early) ethical guidance of biomedical innovation.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Can reproductive genetic manipulation save lives?Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2020Article
- Gene editing and disabled people: a response to Felicity Boardman.Journal of community genetics · 2020Article
- The Ethics of Gene Editing from an Islamic Perspective: A Focus on the Recent Gene Editing of the Chinese Twins.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Human genome editing and the identity politics of genetic disability.Journal of community genetics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.