ReviewHealth science reports2021
Great future or greedy venture: Precision medicine needs philosophy.
Review in Health science reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Theorizing epidemiology, the stories bodies tell, and embodied truths: a status update on contending 21International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2024Review
- Great future or greedy venture: Precision medicine needs philosophy.Health science reports · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOver the past decade, we have witnessed the initiation and implementation of precision medicine (PM), a discipline that promises to individualize and personalize medical management and treatment, rendering them ultimately more precise and effective. Despite of the continuing advances and numerous clinical applications, the potential of PM remains highly controversial, sparking heated debates about its future.
methodThe present article reviews the philosophical issues and practical challenges that are critical to the feasibility and implementation of PM. OUTCOME: The explanation and argument about the relations between PM and computability, uncertainty as well as complexity, show that key foundational assumptions of PM might not be fully validated.
conclusionThe present analysis suggests that our current understanding of PM is probably oversimplified and too superficial. More efforts are needed to realize the hope that PM has elicited, rather than make the term just as a hype.
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.