ArticleHeliyon2021
Researchers views about perceived harms and benefits of gene editing: A study from the MENA region.
Article in Heliyon, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Created, Not Engineered: Analyzing Human Gene Editing from a Catholic Anthropological and Moral Perspective.Journal of religion and health · 2026Article
- Public acceptance of genome editing in Saudi Arabia is driven by therapeutic benefit despite limited awareness.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- The role of zygotic genome activation in genetic-related reproductive medicine: Technological perspective, religious and bioethical concerns, challenges and benefits.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2024Article
- Human Heritable Genome Editing and its Governance: Views of Scientists and Governance Professionals.New genetics and society · 2024Article
- Ethical Perspectives of Therapeutic Human Genome Editing From Multiple and Diverse Viewpoints: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe development of gene editing technologies is very promising for the treatment of genetic diseases. However, gene editing can be also used to enhance the characteristics of healthy individuals. This study aims to determine ethical challenges that may face the constitution of gene editing in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.
methodsAn online discussion forum about the ethical challenges of applying gene editing technologies was held. The participants were a group of researchers (n = 28) from the MENA region.
resultsMost of the participants agreed on the importance of gene editing for the treatment of genetic diseases. However, participants had concerns regarding the use of gene editing to enhance the characteristics of healthy individuals such as athletic abilities and intelligence. Among ethical issues that were raised are justice, harm, beneficence, discrimination, conflict with religion and culture, and lack of regulations.
conclusionSeveral ethical issues were raised for using gene editing technologies based on the perception of biomedical researchers from the MENA region. Therefore, the scientific community and other interested bioethical, social, legal, and governmental parties should be provided with a detailed guide from the scientists in this area for future uses of this 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.