ArticleBMC medical ethics2020
Ethics parallel research: an approach for (early) ethical guidance of biomedical innovation.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Ethical Implications of Tissue Engineering for Regenerative Purposes: A Systematic Review.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Applications of Recombinant DNA Technology in Medicine: A Comprehensive Review.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
- Bioethics-in-Science : An Invitation.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Exploring Attitudes Toward AI-Based Contactless Sensors in Health Among Five Stakeholder Groups: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Imagining an ethics for synthetic biology.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Cerebral organoids and organoid intelligence: ethical challenges and governance pathway.Frontiers of medicine · 2025Article
- From consultors to collaborators - An SOP for advancing ethics engagement in science.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2025Article
- Integrating ethics in digital mental healthcare technologies: a principle-based empirically grounded roadmap approach.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025Article
- More ethics in the laboratory, please! Scientists' perspectives on ethics in the preclinical phase.Accountability in research · 2025Article
- The impact of digital health technologies on moral responsibility: a scoping review.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025Article
- Clinical applications of human organoids.Nature medicine · 2025Review
- Predicting age of onset and progression of disease in late-onset genetic neurodegenerative diseases: An ethics review and research agenda.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Review
- How to embed ethics into laboratory research.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- Ethics of research engagement with Deaf people. A qualitative evidence synthesis.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2024Review
- The Ethics of Stem Cell-Based Embryo-Like Structures : A Focus Group Study on the Perspectives of Dutch Professionals and Lay Citizens.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024Article
- Qualitative studies involving users of clinical neurotechnology: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Developer perspectives on the ethics of AI-driven neural implants: a qualitative study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Electrical and Magnetic Neuromodulation Technologies and Brain-Computer Interfaces: Ethical Considerations for Enhancement of Brain Function in Healthy People - A Systematic Scoping Review.Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery · 2024Article
- Improving shared decision-making about cancer treatment through design-based data-driven decision-support tools and redesigning care paths: an overview of the 4D PICTURE project.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- The ethical significance of user-control in AI-driven speech-BCIs: a narrative review.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur human societies and certainly also (bio) medicine are more and more permeated with technology. There seems to be an increasing awareness among bioethicists that an effective and comprehensive approach to ethically guide these emerging biomedical innovations into society is needed. Such an approach has not been spelled out yet for bioethics, while there are frequent calls for ethical guidance of biomedical innovation, also by biomedical researchers themselves. New and emerging biotechnologies require anticipation of possible effects and implications, meaning the scope is not evaluative after a technology has been fully developed or about hypothetical technologies, but real-time for a real biotechnology. MAIN TEXT: In this paper we aim to substantiate and discuss six ingredients that we increasingly see adopted by ethicists and that together constitute "ethics parallel research". This approach allows to fulfil two aims: guiding the development process of technologies in biomedicine and providing input for the normative evaluation of such technologies. The six ingredients of ethics parallel research are: (1) disentangling wicked problems, (2) upstream or midstream ethical analysis, (3) ethics from within, (4) inclusion of empirical research, (5) public participation and (6) mapping societal impacts, including hard and soft impacts. We will draw on gene editing, organoid technology and artificial intelligence as examples to illustrate these six ingredients.
conclusionEthics parallel research brings together these ingredients to ethically analyse and proactively or parallel guide technological development. It widens the roles and judgements from the ethicist to a more anticipatory and constructively guiding role. Ethics parallel research is characterised by a constructive, rather than a purely critical perspective, it focusses on developing best-practices rather than outlining worst practice, and draws on insights from social sciences and philosophy of technology.
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.