Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26396656›Full record

ArticleSystems and synthetic biology2014

Cartoons on bacterial balloons: scientists' opinion on the popularization of synthetic biology.

Martí Domínguez, Anna Mateu, Helge Torgersen, Manuel Porcar

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Systems and synthetic biology, 2014. 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. Creating life and the media: translations and echoes.Life sciences, society and policy · 2018
    Review
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

4 authors.

Martí DomínguezLanguage Theory and Communication Sciences Department, University of Valencia, Blasco Ibáñez 32, 46008 Valencia, Spain ; The Two Cultures Observatory, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Anna MateuThe Two Cultures Observatory, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Helge TorgersenInstitute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria.
Manuel PorcarThe Two Cultures Observatory, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain ; Cavanilles Institute of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain ; Fundació General, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do scientists perceive the media coverage of synthetic biology (SB)? In this paper, we approach this question by studying a set of cartoons devoted to SB. Based on a categorization of the cartoons into five large thematic groups an international survey was carried out to assess the opinion of SB research groups on science communication with regard to the public image of their discipline. The 101 responses obtained indicate that in general, their perception of the communication is not negative, although many respondents raised concerns on the media's inclination to sensationalism and over-simplification. However, the results also suggest that (in the light of the unfortunate experiences with GMO communication) scientists should think twice before proposing metaphorical interpretations of their research.

Indexed as

Public understanding of scienceScience cartoonsScience communicationSynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID26396656
PMCPMC4571726

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.