Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38074755›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

On the diversity of ideas in academic spaces.

Sandro Galea

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sandro GaleaOffice of the Dean, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States.
Boston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Universities and other academic spaces are social institutions that exist primarily for ideas-to generate, curate, and transmit ideas to students and to the world. Academic spaces cannot carry out that function without supporting a diversity of perspectives. At the same time, universities must reckon-as must all social institutions-with changing norms around how to engage with ideas that challenge, provoke, even anger members of the communities dedicated to their discussion. It is on these institutions to listen to and learn from these ideas, consistent with their core function, while engaging pragmatically with the challenges and controversies that can arise whenever ideas are regularly and freely aired. While there should indeed be limits to the range of tolerable expression within universities, the imposition of these limits should happen rarely, with caution and humility. It is important that academic institutions recognize that while contemporary preoccupations that influence our engagement with speech may change, the secret to universities' durability over the centuries is that our core purpose-the generation and exploration of ideas-does, and should, not. This inherent value for societies is worth preserving, even, and particularly, in the face of societal pressure and change.

Indexed as

Information DisseminationStudentsHumansUniversitiesadvocacyfree speechLimitspublic healthuniversities

Identifiers

PMID38074755
PMCPMC10703355
OpenAlexW4388940173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.