ArticleFrontiers in genetics2022
Sharing and Safeguarding Pediatric Data.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participant Perspectives on Data Sharing in Clinical Craniofacial Research: Qualitative Interviews With Participants With Craniofacial Microsomia and Their Caregivers.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- Public and patient involvement in developing a survey on re-consent for pediatric genomic data sharing in Japan: a GRIPP2-LF report.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Biomarkers of Treatment Response in Paediatric Medulloblastoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Potential of Digital Twins for Pediatric Rare Diseases.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Review
- Toward governance of artificial intelligence in pediatric healthcare.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Re-consent practices in biobanks in Japan: current status and stakeholder perspectives.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Population monitoring of trisomy 21: problems and approaches.Molecular cytogenetics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data sharing is key to advancing our understanding of human health and well-being. While issues related to pediatric research warrant strong ethical protections, overly protectionist policies may serve to exclude minors from data sharing initiatives. Pediatric data sharing is critical to scientific research concerning health and well-being, to say nothing of understanding human development generally. For example, large-scale pediatric longitudinal studies, such as those in the DREAM-BIG Consortium, on the influence of prenatal adversity factors on child psychopathology, will provide prevention data and generate future health benefits. Recent initiatives have formulated sound policy to help enable and foster data sharing practices for pediatric research. To help translate these policy initiatives into practice, we discuss how model consent clauses for pediatric research can help address some of the issues and challenges of pediatric data sharing, while enabling data sharing.
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.