ArticleThe CRISPR journal2019
Societal and Ethical Impacts of Germline Genome Editing: How Can We Secure Human Rights?
Article in The CRISPR journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What do people think about genetic engineering? A systematic review of questionnaire surveys before and after the introduction of CRISPR.Frontiers in genome editing · 2023Pooled it
- Created, Not Engineered: Analyzing Human Gene Editing from a Catholic Anthropological and Moral Perspective.Journal of religion and health · 2026Article
- New hope and promise with CRISPR-Cas9 technology for the treatment of HIV.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025Review
- Anticipatory gaps challenge the public governance of heritable human genome editing.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- States of Uncertainty, Risk-Benefit Assessment and Early Clinical Research: A Conceptual Investigation.Science and engineering ethics · 2022Article
- Toward Anticipatory Governance of Human Genome Editing: A Critical Review of Scholarly Governance Discourse.Journal of responsible innovation · 2021Article
- Bioethical issues in genome editing by CRISPR-Cas9 technology.Turkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection to:2019 · Witkowsy, Lea B [corrected to Witkowsky, Lea B]
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome editing has opened up the possibility of heritable alteration of the human germline. The potential of this powerful tool has spurred a call for establishing robust regulatory frameworks to outline permissible uses of genome editing and to map a rational and ethical course. In response, major national scientific bodies and international organizations have convened and released comprehensive reports outlining recommendations for ethical regulatory frameworks. Significantly, these include an emphasis on public participation and the development of principles to guide future applications of genome editing. While essential, public input and principles are not sufficient to ensure ethical uses of this technology. We propose an approach that relies not only on agreed-upon principles and a democratic process but requires a Human Rights Impact Assessment to evaluate the potential burdens that such biomedical interventions may place on human rights.
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.