Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34395922›Full record

ArticleWellcome open research2020

Making sense of it all: Ethical reflections on the conditions surrounding the first genome-edited babies.

Qi Chen, Yonghui Ma, Markus Labude, G Owen Schaefer, Vicki Xafis, Peter Mills

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wellcome open research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Qi ChenCentre for Bioethics, Medical School, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361102, China.
Yonghui MaCentre for Bioethics, Medical School, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361102, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5787-8445
Markus LabudeCentre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 117597, Singapore.
G Owen SchaeferCentre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 117597, Singapore.
Vicki XafisCentre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 117597, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5104-9686
Peter MillsNuffield Council on Bioethics, London, WC1B 3JS, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2080-8424

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In November 2018 the birth of the first genome-edited human beings was announced by Chinese scientist, He Jiankui. The ensuing ethical controversy, institutional investigations and legal proceedings led to the revision of standards, rules and procedures at many levels. Arguably, however, these developments have not fundamentally changed the conditions or the culture that nourished He Jiankui's vaulting ambition in the first place and enabled it to find expression. In this paper we explore the clinical, regulatory and societal circumstances of the 'gene-edited baby' case, the political, cultural and economic conditions that created a radical and dangerous climate for biotechnology innovation, and the responsibilities of the international research community, many of whose members were apprised of Dr He's intentions. The aim is not to heap anathemas on the heads of implicated individuals but to draw attention to the need for different communities (researchers, authorities and domestic publics) to play a part actively in the governance of biomedical innovation and for research to be bridled by human values.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas9Gene editingHe JiankuiHIVHuman germline genome editingResearch ethicsResearch governanceTwins/genetics

Identifiers

PMID34395922
PMCPMC8340653

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.