Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26351372›Full record

ReviewBritish medical bulletin2015

Social and ethical issues in mitochondrial donation.

Rebecca Dimond

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British medical bulletin, 2015. 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
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Therapeutic Impact of Mitochondrial Transplants for Cardiovascular Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Genetic affinity and the right to 'three-parent IVF'.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2017
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rebecca DimondCardiff School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK dimondr1@cardiff.ac.uk.
Cardiff University · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION OR

backgroundThe UK is at the forefront of mitochondrial science and is currently the only country in the world to legalize germ-line technologies involving mitochondrial donation. However, concerns have been raised about genetic modification and the 'slippery slope' to designer babies. SOURCES OF DATA: This review uses academic articles, newspaper reports and public documents. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Mitochondrial donation offers women with mitochondrial disease an opportunity to have healthy, genetically related children. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Key areas of disagreement include safety, the creation of three-parent babies, impact on identity, implications for society, definitions of genetic modification and reproductive choice. GROWING POINTS: The UK government legalized the techniques in March 2015. Scientific and medical communities across the world followed the developments with interest. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: It is expected that the first cohort of 'three parent' babies will be born in the UK in 2016. Their health and progress will be closely monitored.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalGenetic EngineeringHumansMitochondriaMitochondrial DiseasesMitochondrial Replacement TherapySocial Valuesethical issuesmitochondrial donationreproduction

Identifiers

PMID26351372
PMCPMC4562371
OpenAlexW1884772115

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.