ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2017
Investigating Public trust in Expert Knowledge: Narrative, Ethics, and Engagement.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2017. 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.
- Trustworthy artificial intelligence and the European Union AI act: On the conflation of trustworthiness and acceptability of risk.Regulation & governance · 2024Article
- Ecologies of Public Trust: The NHS COVID-19 Contact Tracing App.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- Unmasking the Ethics of Public Health Messaging in a Pandemic.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- Trends in Food Preferences and Sustainable Behavior during the COVID-19 Lockdown: Evidence from Spanish Consumers.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Medical Mistrust and Enduring Racism in South Africa.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- Understanding the messages and motivation of vaccine hesitant or refusing social media influencers.Vaccine · 2021Article
- Trust in national health information sources in the United States: comparing predictors and levels of trust across three health domains.Translational behavioral medicine · 2020Article
- Rearranging Deck Chairs on a Sinking Ship? : Some Reflections on Ethics and Reproduction Looking Back at 2017 and Ahead at 2018.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2018Article
- Prestidigitation vs. Public Trust: Or How We Can Learn to Change the Conversation and Prevent Powers From "Organizing the Discontent".Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
"Public Trust in Expert Knowledge: Narrative, Ethics, and Engagement" examines the social, cultural, and ethical ramifications of changing public trust in the expert biomedical knowledge systems of emergent and complex global societies. This symposium was conceived as an interdisciplinary project, drawing on bioethics, the social sciences, and the medical humanities. We settled on public trust as a topic for our work together because its problematization cuts across our fields and substantive research interests. For us, trust is simultaneously a matter of ethics, social relations, and the cultural organization of meaning. We share a commitment to narrative inquiry across our fields of expertise in the bioethics of transformative health technologies, public communications on health threats, and narrative medicine. The contributions to this symposium have applied, in different ways and with different effects, this interdisciplinary mode of inquiry, supplying new reflections on public trust, expertise, and biomedical knowledge.
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.