ReviewThe Journal of infectious diseases2016
Gain-of-Function Research and the Relevance to Clinical Practice.
Review in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding biosafety practitioner perspectives.Politics and the life sciences : the journal of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences · 2026Article
- Interspecies Jumping of Bat Coronaviruses.Viruses · 2021Review
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Research Opportunities for Infection and Blood Purification Therapies.Critical care explorations · 2021Review
- Reply to Lipsitch.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2016Article
- Comment on "Gain-of-Function Research and the Relevance to Clinical Practice".The Journal of infectious diseases · 2016Article
- Engineering Coronaviruses to Evaluate Emergence and Pathogenic Potential.Trends in microbiology · 2016Article
- Infectious Diseases Society of America and Gain-of-Function Experiments With Pathogens Having Pandemic Potential.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2016Article
- European Academies Advise on Gain-of-Function Studies in Influenza Virus Research.Journal of virology · 2015Review
- When gain-of-function research is not "gain-of-function" research.EMBO reports · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ongoing moratorium on gain-of-function (GOF) research with highly pathogenic avian influenza virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus has drawn attention to the current debate on these research practices and the potential benefits and risks they present. While much of the discussion has been steered by members of the microbiology and policy communities, additional input from medical practitioners will be highly valuable toward developing a broadly inclusive policy that considers the relative value and harm of GOF research. This review attempts to serve as a primer on the topic for the clinical community by providing a historical context for GOF research, summarizing concerns about its risks, and surveying the medical products that it has yielded.
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.