Digital Medicine: An Opportunity to Revisit the Role of Bioethicists.

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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

1. Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2023
   Pooled it
2. The ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic review of reasons reported in the academic literature.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
   Pooled it
3. A Value-centered Exploration of Data Privacy and Personalized Privacy Assistants.Digital society : ethics, socio-legal and governance of digital technology · 2022
   Article
4. A Call for Behavioral Science in Embedded Bioethics.Perspectives in biology and medicine · 2022
   Article
5. Bringing AI to the clinic: blueprint for a vendor-neutral AI deployment infrastructure.Insights into imaging · 2021
   Review
6. SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 2: Exploring the ethical implications of its application in primary care practice.The European journal of general practice · 2020
   Article
7. Ethics parallel research: an approach for (early) ethical guidance of biomedical innovation.BMC medical ethics · 2020
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "The Ethics of Smart Pills and Self-Acting Devices: Autonomy, Truth-Telling, and Trust at the Dawn of Digital Medicine".2018
• Comment on
  The Ethics of Smart Pills and Self-Acting Devices: Autonomy, Truth-Telling, and Trust at the Dawn of Digital Medicine.2018

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as