Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26843669›Full record

ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)

Integrating Public Health and Deliberative Public Bioethics: Lessons from the Human Genome Project Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Program.

Karen M Meagher, Lisa M Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Essentials of Multiomics.The oncologist · 2022
    Article
  5. Developing an informational tool for ethical engagement in medical tourism.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2017
    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

2 authors.

Karen M MeagherPresidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, Washington, DC.
Lisa M LeePresidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, Washington, DC.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public health policy works best when grounded in firm public health standards of evidence and widely shared social values. In this article, we argue for incorporating a specific method of ethical deliberation--deliberative public bioethics--into public health. We describe how deliberative public bioethics is a method of engagement that can be helpful in public health. Although medical, research, and public health ethics can be considered some of what bioethics addresses, deliberative public bioethics offers both a how and where. Using the Human Genome Project Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications program as an example of effective incorporation of deliberative processes to integrate ethics into public health policy, we examine how deliberative public bioethics can integrate both public health and bioethics perspectives into three areas of public health practice: research, education, and health policy. We then offer recommendations for future collaborations that integrate deliberative methods into public health policy and practice.

Indexed as

BioethicsCooperative BehaviorHuman Genome ProjectHumansPublic HealthPublic PolicyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26843669
PMCPMC4716471

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.