ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2019
Genome Editing: Promoting Responsible Research.
Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Harnessing the potential of CRISPR-based platforms to advance the field of hospital medicine.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For more than 40 years, scientists have been developing tools and technologies for genome modification; however, initial progress was slow and few outside of the molecular biology community took an interest in the field. Everything has dramatically changed with the recent appearance of the so-called precision approaches, and especially with the 'CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat) revolution'. With great powers come great responsibilities. CRISPR-derived technologies have been proven efficient, cheap, rather easy and fast, and provided universal access to genome modification techniques beyond the leading research centers and reference laboratories. The popularization of techniques to manipulate the human genome and that of all other living beings consequently raises many essential questions, on the ethical and legal sides, both for the scientific community and the lay public. In order to mitigate excessive hype and concern among citizens, a call for the mobilization of the various stakeholders is now urgent through a global governance of genome editing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31933285What 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.