ArticleThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2017
Gene Editing in Humans: Towards a Global and Inclusive Debate for Responsible Research.
Article in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gene Therapy and Gene Editing: Current Trends and Future Prospects of Molecular Medicine.Current gene therapy · 2026Review
- Prenatal gene editing for neurodevelopmental diseases: Ethical considerations.American journal of human genetics · 2025Review
- The Challenge of CRISPR-Cas Toward Bioethics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Review
- Why Do Firms Implement Responsible Innovation? The Case of Emerging Technologies in South Korea.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Genome editing with the CRISPR-Cas system: an art, ethics and global regulatory perspective.Plant biotechnology journal · 2020Review
- Human germline genome editing is illegal in Canada, but could it be desirable for some members of the rare disease community?Journal of community genetics · 2020Review
- Genome Editing: Promoting Responsible Research.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2019Article
- ARRIGE Arrives: Toward the Responsible Use of Genome Editing.The CRISPR journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In December 2016, the Opinion Group of the Bioethics and Law Observatory (OBD) of the University of Barcelona launched a Declaration on Bioethics and Gene Editing in Humans analyzing the use of genome editing techniques and their social, ethical, and legal implications through a multidisciplinary approach. It focuses on CRISPR/Cas9, a genome modification technique that enables researchers to edit specific sections of the DNA sequence of humans and other living beings. This technique has generated expectations and worries that deserve an interdisciplinary analysis and an informed social debate. The research work developed by the OBD presents a set of recommendations addressed to different stakeholders and aims at being a tool to learn more about CRISPR/Cas9 while finding an appropriate ethical and legal framework for this new technology. This article gathers and compares reports that have been published in Europe and the USA since the OBD Declaration. It aims at being a tool to foster a global and interdisciplinary discussion of this new genome editing technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29259532PMC5733855What 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.