ArticleDNA and cell biology2022
Building Blocks of Virtuous Science Communication: Grant Funding, Policy Making, and Public Engagement.
Article in DNA and cell biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The importance of science communication and public engagement to professional associations.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Article
- Six areas of consideration when designing and conducting online surveys in microbiology for facilitating improved scientific communication.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
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
Grant writing, science policy and public engagement (PE) activities are forms of science communication, and all are essential for research to function and benefit our society. Scientists rely on competitive grant funding to finance their research; this is an opportunity for researchers to communicate their scientific vision and engage funders, major players in defining how public funds and government policies are prioritized to drive research and innovation. PE is often still seen as a box-ticking or persuasion exercise, yet establishing the right communication channels with the public is pivotal for a scientist's job to impact society. We believe that evidence-based communication is becoming essential in a world dominated by an excess of information, where verified sources are under pressure. Support in the form of dedicated training and allocated resources, particularly for early career researchers, can help establish what we describe as a long-lasting virtuous circle, in which public funds are spent effectively toward scientific advances that the public and policy makers can embrace.
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.