Avoiding a Tyranny of the Majority: Public Deliberation as Citizen Science, Sensitive Issues, and Vulnerable Populations.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. A 4-Site Public Deliberation Project on the Acceptability of Youth Self-Consent in Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials: Assessment of Facilitator Fidelity to Key Principles.JMIR formative research · 2025
   Article
2. Public Deliberation for Ethically Complex Policies: The Case of Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2024
   Article
3. Assessing Facilitator Fidelity to Principles of Public Deliberation: Tutorial.JMIR formative research · 2023
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  The Rise of Citizen Science in Health and Biomedical Research.2019

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as