ReviewMolecular therapy. Methods & clinical development2017
Public Attitudes toward Gene Therapy in China.
Review in Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What do people think about genetic engineering? A systematic review of questionnaire surveys before and after the introduction of CRISPR.Frontiers in genome editing · 2023Pooled it
- Patient and public perspectives on cell and gene therapies: a systematic review.Nature communications · 2020Pooled it
- Attitudes of clinical geneticists and certified genetic counselors to genome editing and its clinical applications: A nation-wide questionnaire survey in Japan.Journal of human genetics · 2019Trial
- Public knowledge, attitudes, and ethical views on CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing for genetic diseases in Taif, Saudi Arabia.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Acceptance of Cell and Gene Therapy Among Patients with Hematological Diseases in China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Public perceptions and willingness to accept somatic gene therapy: A Belgian survey study.Open research Europe · 2025Article
- Moral judgment of genetic technologies: validation of the genetic technologies questionnaire in the German-speaking population.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- What's in a word? Defining "gene therapy medicines".Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2024Article
- Religious Beliefs Shaping Health Care and Transforming Health Concepts: The Case of Shanghai.Journal of religion and health · 2024Article
- Survey of attitude to human genome modification in Nigeria.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Human genome editing in clinical applications: Japanese lay and expert attitudes.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Medical student acceptance on gene therapy to increase children's well-being with genetic diseases: a study in Indonesia.Future science OA · 2022Article
- The genetic technologies questionnaire: lay judgments about genetic technologies align with ethical theory, are coherent, and predict behaviour.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Comparison of public discussions of gene editing on social media between the United States and China.PloS one · 2022Article
- Should germline genome editing be allowed? The effect of treatment characteristics on public acceptability.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Gene Therapy Knowledge and Attitude Among Healthcare Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Attitudes of Indonesian Medical Doctors and Medical Students Toward Genome Editing.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- Attitudes of Members of Genetics Professional Societies Toward Human Gene Editing.The CRISPR journal · 2019Article
- Attitudes of Potential Participants Towards Molecular Therapy Trials in Huntington's Disease.Journal of Huntington's disease · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.