ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2021
Is Malaysia Ready for Human Gene Editing: A Regulatory, Biosafety and Biosecurity Perspective.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2021. 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.
- Strengthening legal safeguards against genetic discrimination: review and recommendations for Malaysia.Journal of community genetics · 2026Review
- Public acceptance of genome editing in Saudi Arabia is driven by therapeutic benefit despite limited awareness.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Knowledge and attitude of Malaysian university students towards regenerative medicine therapy and their clinical implications: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Advancing microbiota therapeutics: the role of synthetic biology in engineering microbial communities for precision medicine.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Biomaterials-mediated CRISPR/Cas9 delivery: recent challenges and opportunities in gene therapy.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Review
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
Gene editing platforms have revolutionized the field of genetics with a direct impact on the public health system. Although there are apparent benefits, it is often accompanied by public debates over its uncertainties and risks. In the Malaysian context, modern biotechnology has raised questions about how to best govern gene editing in regulations, biosafety, and biosecurity. Even though standards and guidelines on stem cell and cell-based therapies have been developed, there are no appropriate legal frameworks available for gene editing yet. Nevertheless, biosafety regulations were established to balance promoting biotechnology and protecting against their potential environmental and human health risks. There is also a need to address the potential of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as bioweapons. Numerous frameworks from several international organizations may provide valuable input in formulating documents on gene editing. By establishing comprehensive guidelines, legal policies, and standards to tackle the challenges and risks associated with gene editing, Malaysia can successfully apply this modern technology in this country.
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.