ArticleAmerican journal of public health2018
The Belmont Report at 40: Reckoning With Time.
Article in American journal of public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Towards a Greater Understanding of the Role of the Environment: A Systematic Review of Qualitative MZ Twin Differences Studies.Behavior genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Ethical considerations for implantable human brain-computer interfaces.Nature neuroscience · 2026Article
- Teaching AI ethics in medical schools: a scoping review protocol on the ethical-technical balance in curricular frameworks.BMJ open · 2026Article
- AI-readiness Criteria for Biomedical Data.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Precision justice: An imaginary of data and justice.Social studies of science · 2025Article
- Vaccine and Treatment Evaluation Units: A Historical Perspective.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Article
- Bridging theory and practice: Experiences of diagnostic radiography students during clinical training in resource-constrained settings.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Informed consent: Navigating the bioethical complexities of clinical research.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Community engagement for artificial intelligence health research in Africa.Wellcome open research · 2025Review
- Vulnerability in research ethics: A call for assessing vulnerability and implementing protections.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Ethical requirements of instructions for authors of complementary and alternative medicine journals: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Defining interventions and metrics to improve diversity in CNS clinical trial participation: A SNO and RANO effort.Neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- WHO CAN USE YOUR CELLS OR TISSUES FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH?Frontiers for young minds · 2024Article
- Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy in Military and Veterans Healthcare Systems: Clinical, Legal, and Implementation Considerations.Current psychiatry reports · 2023Review
- Reimagining research ethics to include environmental sustainability: a principled approach, including a case study of data-driven health research.Journal of medical ethics · 2023Article
- "If You are Going to Step on This Campus, You Have to Get Vaccinated": A Qualitative Understanding of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Black Emerging Adults Returning to College Campuses.Emerging adulthood (Print) · 2023Article
- Review of Clinical Equipoise: Examples from Oncology Trials.Current reviews in clinical and experimental pharmacology · 2023Review
- DDS Profile: Juanita L. Merchant, MD, PhD.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- An Idealized Clinicogenomic Registry to Engage Underrepresented Populations Using Innovative Technology.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It was the summer of 1972 when a stunned nation first learned of the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study, during which hundreds of poor, disease-stricken black men from Macon County Alabama, had been deliberately left untreated for 40 years. Coming on the heels of multiple, earlier examples of unethical human experimentation, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study made it plain that the moral foundation of human subject research was in desperate need of repair. Blind reliance on the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki was no longer going to suffice. It was against this backdrop that Congress resolved to act. Numerous hearings and multiple spirited discussions later, an agreement was struck to constitute the "Commission." The outgrowth of a retreat held at the Smithsonian Institution's Belmont Conference Center, the Belmont Report lays out a principled analytical framework to "guide the resolution of ethical problems arising from research involving human subjects." Durable and ever-present, the Belmont Report, which is the foundational document that reset the ethics of human subject research, must now reckon with all-important novel issues of the day that could not have been foreseen by its drafters.
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.