ArticleBioSocieties2022
Core values of genomic citizen science: results from a qualitative interview study.
Article in BioSocieties, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- History, Hype, and Responsible Psychedelic Medicine: A Qualitative Study of Psychedelic Researchers.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Open Science Practices in Psychiatric Genetics: A Primer.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2024Review
- Blending citizen science with natural language processing and machine learning: Understanding the experience of living with multiple sclerosis.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Navigating biosafety concerns within COVID-19 do-it-yourself (DIY) science: an ethnographic and interview study.BioSocieties · 2023Article
- Pirate Talk: Navigating Practical, Ethical, and Legal Issues Associated with Biomedical Citizen Science Interview Studies.Citizen science : theory and practice · 2022Article
- The Promissory Visions of DIYbio: Reimaging Science from the Fringe.Science as culture · 2022Article
- "Idealists and capitalists": ownership attitudes and preferences in genomic citizen science.New genetics and society · 2022Article
- A best-worst scaling experiment to prioritize concern about ethical issues in citizen science reveals heterogeneity on people-level v. data-level issues.Scientific reports · 2021Observational
- "A cohort of pirate ships": biomedical citizen scientists' attitudes toward ethical oversight.Citizen science : theory and practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic citizen science initiatives that promote public involvement in the study or manipulation of genetic information are flourishing. These initiatives are diverse and range from data donation studies, to biological experimentation conducted in home and community laboratories, to self-experimentation. Understanding the values that citizen scientists associate with their activities and communities can be useful to policy development for citizen science. Here, we report values-relevant data from qualitative interviews with 38 stakeholders in genomic citizen science. Applying a theoretical framework that describes values as transcendent beliefs about desirable end states or behaviors that can be categorized according to the motivational goals that they express and the interests they serve, we identified nine core values of genomic citizen science: altruism, autonomy, fun, inclusivity, openness, reciprocity, respect, safety, and solidarity.
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.