ArticleMammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society2019
Fearful old world? A commentary on the Second International Summit on human genome editing.
Article in Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heritable Genome Editing in a Global Context: National and International Policy Challenges.The Hastings Center report · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genome editing is revolutionising our ability to modify genomes with exquisite precision for medical and agricultural applications, and in basic research. The first International Summit on Human Genome Editing, organised jointly by the US National Academies of Sciences and Medicine, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the UK Royal Society, was held in Washington DC at the end of 2015. Its aim was to explore scientific, legal and ethical perspectives on the prospective use of human genome editing as a therapeutic intervention in disease (so-called somatic genome editing) and as a possible intervention in human reproduction (so-called germ-line genome editing). Following that Summit, the Organising Committee had, in a press release, come to the conclusion that: "It would be irresponsible to proceed with any clinical use of germ line editing unless and until (i) the relevant safety and efficacy issues have been resolved, based on appropriate understanding and balancing of risks, potential benefits and alternatives, and (ii) there is broad societal consensus about the appropriateness of the proposed application" ( http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12032015a ). A report from the US National Academies subsequently reiterated and developed the approach.
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.