Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31482472›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2020

Ethical Challenges in Human Space Missions: A Space Refuge, Scientific Value, and Human Gene Editing for Space.

Konrad Szocik, Ziba Norman, Michael J Reiss

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2020. 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. Space Research Ethics.Science and engineering ethics · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Konrad SzocikUniversity of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszow, Sucharskiego 2 Street, 35-225, Rzeszów, Poland. kszocik@wsiz.rzeszow.pl.
Ziba NormanUCL Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK.
Michael J ReissUCL Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines some selected ethical issues in human space missions including human missions to Mars, particularly the idea of a space refuge, the scientific value of space exploration, and the possibility of human gene editing for deep-space travel. Each of these issues may be used either to support or to criticize human space missions. We conclude that while these issues are complex and context-dependent, there appear to be no overwhelming obstacles such as cost effectiveness, threats to human life or protection of pristine space objects, to sending humans to space and to colonize space. The article argues for the rationality of the idea of a space refuge and the defensibility of the idea of human enhancement applied to future deep-space astronauts.

Indexed as

Gene EditingSpace FlightAstronautsHumansBioethicsFuture studiesGene editingHuman enhancementHuman mission to MarsSpace ethicsSpace refuge

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.