Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36415857›Full record

ReviewSynthetic biology (Oxford, England)2022

Hurdles in responsive community engagement for the development of environmental biotechnologies.

Avery M Normandin, Lily M Fitzgerald, Julianne Yip, Sam Weiss Evans

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Synthetic biology (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Social license -What's in a name?Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Avery M NormandinMedia Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Lily M FitzgeraldMedia Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Julianne YipMedia Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2481-6763
Sam Weiss EvansProgram on Science, Technology and Society, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8547-3314

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent calls for engaging communities in biotechnology development do not draw enough attention to the hurdles that must be overcome for engagement strategies to effectively feed back into research design and conduct. These hurdles call into question many standard ways of operating and assessing in traditional scientific disciplines. The first steps in addressing these hurdles can be the most difficult. In reflecting on our own experiences in the early-stage development of environmental biotechnologies, we provide a set of techniques to help scientists and their collaborators learn to become more responsive to the needs and attitudes of communities with which they are engaging.

Indexed as

community and stakeholder engagementenvironmental biotechnologiesgene drivesresponsive science

Identifiers

PMID36415857
PMCPMC9675591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.