ArticleNanoethics2017
Safe-by-Design: from Safety to Responsibility.
Article in Nanoethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethics of Gamification in Health and Fitness-Tracking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Microplastics and Nanoplastics in Food: Dietary Toxicology Beyond Particle Counts.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Review
- Engaging U.S. experts in environmental oversight of GE crops as it relates to novel biotechnologies.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Global Trends and Hotspot Analysis of Nanomaterials in the Field of Acne: A Bibliometric Perspective.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a safe innovation framework for crop breeding.GM crops & food · 2025Review
- Characterising Dissolution Dynamics of Engineered Nanomaterials: Advances in Analytical Techniques and Safety-by-Design.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Article
- Utilizing biomaterial surface properties to improve orthopedic hip implant safety and function in a Safe-by-Design approach.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Metal-organic frameworks in oral drug delivery.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2024Article
- Scanning the Horizon for Environmental Applications of Genetically Modified Viruses Reveals Challenges for Their Environmental Risk Assessment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Exploring the Impact of Tensions in Stakeholder Norms on Designing for Value Change: The Case of Biosafety in Industrial Biotechnology.Science and engineering ethics · 2023Article
- A Safe-by-Design Approach to "Reef Safe" Sunscreens Based on ZnO and Organic UV Filters.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Phosphite synthetic auxotrophy as an effective biocontainment strategy for the industrial chassis Pseudomonas putida.Microbial cell factories · 2022Article
- Bottlenecks and opportunities for synthetic biology biosafety standards.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Adopting Safe-by-Design in Science and Engineering Academia: The Soil May Need Tilling.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The politics of scaling.Social studies of science · 2022Article
- Operational safety economics: Foundations, current approaches and paths for future research.Safety science · 2021Article
- Application of Quality by Design to the robust preparation of a liposomal GLA formulation by DELOS-susp method.The Journal of supercritical fluids · 2021Article
- Safe-by-Design in Engineering: An Overview and Comparative Analysis of Engineering Disciplines.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Nanomaterials in Wound Healing and Infection Control.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Responsible Learning About Risks Arising from Emerging Biotechnologies.Science and engineering ethics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Safe-by-design (SbD) aims at addressing safety issues already during the R&D and design phases of new technologies. SbD has increasingly become popular in the last few years for addressing the risks of emerging technologies like nanotechnology and synthetic biology. We ask to what extent SbD approaches can deal with uncertainty, in particular with indeterminacy, i.e., the fact that the actual safety of a technology depends on the behavior of actors in the value chain like users and operators. We argue that while indeterminacy may be approached by designing out users as much as possible in attaining safety, this is often not a good strategy. It will not only make it more difficult to deal with unexpected risks; it also misses out on the resources that users (and others) can bring for achieving safety, and it is undemocratic. We argue that rather than directly designing for safety, it is better to design for the responsibility for safety, i.e., designers should think where the responsibility for safety is best situated and design technologies accordingly. We propose some heuristics that can be used in deciding how to share and distribute responsibility for safety through design.
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.