ArticleThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics2020
The Streetlight Effect: Regulating Genomics Where the Light Is.
Article in The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exposome-wide association study of cognition among older adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.Exposome · 2025Article
- Exposome-wide association study of cognition among older adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Comprehensive mapping of the AOP-Wiki database: identifying biological and disease gaps.Frontiers in toxicology · 2024Article
- How Can Law and Policy Advance Quality in Genomic Analysis and Interpretation for Clinical Care?The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2020Article
- Applying Psychiatry and Psychology Principles to Lifestyle Approaches for Mental and Behavioral Health.American journal of lifestyle medicineReview
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
Regulatory policy for genomic testing may be subject to biases that favor reliance on existing regulatory frameworks even when those frameworks carry unintended legal consequences or may be poorly tailored to the challenges genomic testing presents. This article explores three examples drawn from genetic privacy regulation, oversight of clinical uses of genomic information, and regulation of genomic software. Overreliance on expedient regulatory approaches has a potential to undercut complete and durable solutions.
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.