Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33406134›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

80 questions for UK biological security.

Luke Kemp, David C Aldridge, Olaf Booy, Hilary Bower, Des Browne, Mark Burgmann, Austin Burt, Andrew A Cunningham, Malcolm Dando, Jaimie T A Dick and 29 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Trouble on the horizon: anticipating biological invasions through futures thinking.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. One year on: Are we ready for COVID?Archivos de bronconeumologia · 2021
    Article
  7. One Year On: Are We Ready for COVID?Archivos de bronconeumologia · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

39 authors.

Luke KempBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3816-564X
David C AldridgeBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Olaf BooyGreat Britain Non-native Species Secretariat, Sand Hutton, Animal and Plant Health Agency, York, United Kingdom.
Hilary BowerUK Public Health Rapid Support Team, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1541-6637
Des BrowneBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Mark BurgmannCentre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Austin BurtUK Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew A CunninghamInstitute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, United Kingdom.
Malcolm DandoDivision of Peace Studies and International Development, University of Bradford, Bradford, United Kingdom.
Jaimie T A DickInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom.
Christopher DyeOxford Martin School and Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Sam Weiss EvansBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Belinda GallardoBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
H Charles J GodfrayOxford Martin School and Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Ian GoodfellowDepartment of Pathology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Simon GubbinsThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0538-4173
Lauren A HoltBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Kate E JonesUK Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Hazem KandilBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Phillip MartinBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Mark McCaughanMarine and Fisheries Division, Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Northern Ireland, Downpatrick, United Kingdom.
Caitríona McLeishSPRU, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Thomas MeanyOpenCell, London, United Kingdom.
Kathryn MillettBiosecure Ltd, Bourton-on-the-Water, United Kingdom.
Sean S ÓhÉigeartaighBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Nicola J PatronEarlham Institute, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8389-1851
Catherine RhodesBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Helen E RoyCentre for Ecology & Hydrology, Crowmarsh Gifford, United Kingdom.
Gorm ShackelfordBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0949-0934
Derek SmithCentre for Pathogen Evolution, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Nicola SpenceDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2589-2511
Helene SteinerBiosecure Ltd, Bourton-on-the-Water, United Kingdom.
Lalitha S SundaramBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9595-9753
Silja VoenekyDepartment for Public International Law, Comparative Law, and Ethics of Law, Law Faculty, Freiburg University, Freiburg, Germany.
John R WalkerArms Control and Disarmament Research Unit, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London, United Kingdom.
Harry WatkinsDepartment of Landscape, Arts Tower, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4038-7145
Simon WhitbyDivision of Peace Studies and International Development, University of Bradford, Bradford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5022-3286
James WoodDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
William J SutherlandBiosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's (BioRISC), St Catharine's College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6498-0437

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple national and international trends and drivers are radically changing what biological security means for the United Kingdom (UK). New technologies present novel opportunities and challenges, and globalisation has created new pathways and increased the speed, volume and routes by which organisms can spread. The UK Biological Security Strategy (2018) acknowledges the importance of research on biological security in the UK. Given the breadth of potential research, a targeted agenda identifying the questions most critical to effective and coordinated progress in different disciplines of biological security is required. We used expert elicitation to generate 80 policy-relevant research questions considered by participants to have the greatest impact on UK biological security. Drawing on a collaboratively-developed set of 450 questions, proposed by 41 experts from academia, industry and the UK government (consulting 168 additional experts) we subdivided the final 80 questions into six categories: bioengineering; communication and behaviour; disease threats (including pandemics); governance and policy; invasive alien species; and securing biological materials and securing against misuse. Initially, the questions were ranked through a voting process and then reduced and refined to 80 during a one-day workshop with 35 participants from a variety of disciplines. Consistently emerging themes included: the nature of current and potential biological security threats, the efficacy of existing management actions, and the most appropriate future options. The resulting questions offer a research agenda for biological security in the UK that can assist the targeting of research resources and inform the implementation of the UK Biological Security Strategy. These questions include research that could aid with the mitigation of Covid-19, and preparation for the next pandemic. We hope that our structured and rigorous approach to creating a biological security research agenda will be replicated in other countries and regions. The world, not just the UK, is in need of a thoughtful approach to directing biological security research to tackle the emerging issues.

Indexed as

BioterrorismClinical GovernanceCommunicationCOVID-19Disease Transmission, InfectiousHumansPandemicsPolicySARS-CoV-2Security MeasuresSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID33406134
PMCPMC7787535

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.