Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30079107›Full record

ReviewBMC proceedings2018

GM insect pests under the Brazilian regulatory framework: development and perspectives.

Paulo P Andrade, Marília Andreza da Silva Ferreira, Marta Silva Muniz, Amaro de Casto Lira-Neto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC proceedings, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Paulo P Andrade1Centro de Saúde e Tecnologia Rural, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Patos, PB Brazil.
Marília Andreza da Silva FerreiraDepartamento de Genética, Universidade Federal de Pernabuco, Recife, PE Brazil.
Marta Silva Muniz1Centro de Saúde e Tecnologia Rural, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Patos, PB Brazil.
Amaro de Casto Lira-Neto3Instituto Agronômico de Pernambuco -IPA, Recife, PE Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emergence of new technologies for genetic modification has broadened the range of possible new products. The regulations of many countries that could benefit from these new products may not be prepared to assess risks and enable science-based decision-making. This is especially acute in the case of genetically modified insects with potential use in public health and agriculture. Modifications of the regulatory framework, sometimes necessary to allow a proper risk assessment of products from new technologies, are strongly influenced by political decisions derived from the balance of power and interest among stakeholders. This article discusses the genesis of the Brazilian regulatory framework, its applicability for the risk assessment of genetically modified insects and the scenarios that have shaped the two biosafety laws that established the basis for the use of modern biotechnology in the country. It is concluded that, for the adoption of the new technologies, it is important to carefully navigate the political tensions by seeking the engagement and empowerment of stakeholders supporting science-based decision-making in order to gather the necessary support for adoption of risk assessment as the basis for final decisions, allowing the use of new technologies.

Identifiers

PMID30079107
PMCPMC6069510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.