ArticleComparative medicine2017
Institutional Oversight of Occupational Health and Safety for Research Programs Involving Biohazards.
Article in Comparative medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preclinical coronavirus studies and pathology: Challenges of the high-containment laboratory.Veterinary pathology · 2022Article
- COVID-19 and Animal-Based Research.Comparative medicine · 2021Article
- COVID-19 Impact on Musculoskeletal Regenerative Medicine Research: Maintaining Lab Continuity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Environmental Health and Biosafety Risk Assessment Guidance for Commercial-Scale Cell and Gene Therapy Manufacturing.Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2020Review
- Safety considerations for working with animal models involving human health hazards.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2018Review
- Special Issue: Infectious Disease Research: Animal Models and Risk Management.Comparative medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research with hazardous biologic materials (biohazards) is essential to the progress of medicine and science. The field of microbiology has rapidly advanced over the years, partially due to the development of new scientific methods such as recombinant DNA technology, synthetic biology, viral vectors, and the use of genetically modified animals. This research poses a potential risk to personnel as well as the public and the environment. Institutions must have appropriate oversight and take appropriate steps to mitigate the risks of working with these biologic hazards. This article will review responsibilities for institutional oversight of occupational health and safety for research involving biologic hazards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28662748PMC5482511W2754658388What 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.