Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29869131›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2019

Scientific Ethics: A New Approach.

Marcello Menapace

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Why science needs art.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025
    Article
  2. Can Ethics be Based on Science?Science and engineering ethics · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Marcello MenapaceM&Ms Consulting Limited, 39, Brighton Road, 8 Bridgestone Place, Horsham, West Sussex, RH13 5BU, UK. dr.m.menapace@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-5657-0721

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science is an activity of the human intellect and as such has ethical implications that should be reviewed and taken into account. Although science and ethics have conventionally been considered different, it is herewith proposed that they are essentially similar. The proposal set henceforth is to create a new ethics rooted in science: scientific ethics. Science has firm axiological foundations and searches for truth (as a value, axiology) and knowledge (epistemology). Hence, science cannot be value neutral. Looking at standard scientific principles, it is possible to construct a scientific ethic (that is, an ethical framework based on scientific methods and rules), which can be applied to all sciences. These intellectual standards include the search for truth (honesty and its derivatives), human dignity (and by reflection the dignity of all animals) and respect for life. Through these it is thence achievable to draft a foundation of a ethics based purely on science and applicable beyond the confines of science. A few applications of these will be presented. Scientific ethics can have vast applications in other fields even in non scientific ones.

Indexed as

KnowledgePersonhoodValue of LifeAltruismEfficiencyEthical TheoryHumansMoralsResearch SubjectsScienceSocial ResponsibilityEthicsHuman dignityRespect for lifeScientific ethics, honestyTruth

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.