ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022
Ethical Considerations for Gene Drive: Challenges of Balancing Inclusion, Power and Perspectives.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term stability and performance of Cas9/guide RNA-based gene drives in anopheline mosquitoes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Rapid turnover of sex-determining architecture in invasive mussels.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Harnessing CRISPR-Cas technology for insect pest control: current advances and future perspectives.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- From designer babies to edited food: comparing public attitudes toward CRISPR technology and gene editing in Japan and the United States.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Exploratory conversations with biodiversity-oriented civil society groups on the potential applications of gene drive-modified mosquitoes for malaria control in Tanzania.Transgenic research · 2026Article
- Is Gene Drive Research Losing Traction?The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- Antioxidant Defense Systems in Plants: Mechanisms, Regulation, and Biotechnological Strategies for Enhanced Oxidative Stress Tolerance.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Population dynamics in spatial suppression gene drive models and the effect of resistance, density dependence, and life history.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Practical Application of a Relationship-Based Model to Engagement for Gene-Drive Vector Control Programs.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024Article
- Taking stock: Is gene drive research delivering on its principles?Gates open research · 2024Article
- The Promise and Challenge of Genetic Biocontrol Approaches for Malaria Elimination.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023Review
- Dichotomous sperm in Lepidopteran insects: a biorational target for pest management.Frontiers in insect science · 2023Review
- Use of Insect Promoters in Genetic Engineering to Control Mosquito-Borne Diseases.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Operationalizing stakeholder engagement for gene drive research in malaria elimination in Africa-translating guidance into practice.Malaria journal · 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
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Progress in gene-drive research has stimulated discussion and debate on ethical issues including community engagement and consent, policy and governance, and decision-making involved in development and deployment. Many organizations, academic institutions, foundations, and individual professionals have contributed to ensuring that these issues are considered prior to the application of gene-drive technology. Central topics include co-development of the technology with local stakeholders and communities and reducing asymmetry between developers and end-users. Important questions include with whom to conduct engagement and how to define community acceptance, develop capacity-building activities, and regulate this technology. Experts, academics, and funders have suggested that global frameworks, standards, and guidelines be developed to direct research in answering these important questions. Additionally, it has been suggested that ethical principles or commitments be established to further guide research practices. The challenging and interesting contradiction that we explore here is that the vast majority of these conversations transpire with little or no input from potential end-users or stakeholders who, we contend, should ultimately determine the fate of the technology in their communities. The question arises, whose concerns regarding marginalization, disempowerment, and inequity should be included in discussions and decisions concerning how inequities are perceived and how they may be addressed? At what stage will true co-development occur and how will opinions, perspectives and knowledge held by low-income country stakeholders be applied in determining answers to the questions regarding the ethics being debated on the academic stage? Our opinion is that the time is now.
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.