ReviewWorld journal of plastic surgery2016
Cloning: A Review on Bioethics, Legal, Jurisprudence and Regenerative Issues in Iran.
Review in World journal of plastic surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reasons for unsafe abortion in Iran after pronatalist policy changes: a qualitative study.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Qur'anic Views on Human Cloning (I): Doctrinal and Theological Evidences.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2021Article
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
In recent years, the cloning technology has remarkably developed in Iran, but unfortunately, the required legal framework has not been created to support and protect such developments yet. This legal gap may lead to abuse of scientific researches to obtain illegal benefits and to undermine the intellectual property rights of scientists and researchers. Thus to prevent such consequences, the attempts should be made to create an appropriate legal-ethical system and an approved comprehensive law. In this review we concluded that the right method is guiding and controlling the cloning technology and banning the technique is not always fruitful. Of course, it should be taken into accounts that all are possible if the religion orders human cloning in the view of jurisprudence and is considered as permission. In other words, although the religious order on human cloning can be an absolute permission based on the strong principle of permission, it is not unlikely that in the future, corruption is proved to be real for them, Jurists rule it as secondary sanctity and even as primary one. If it is proved, the phenomenon is considered as example of required affairs based on creation of ethical, social and medical disorders, religious and ethical rulings cannot be as permission for it, and it seems that it is a point that only one case can be a response to it and it needs nothing but time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27853684PMC5109382What 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.