ArticleScience China. Life sciences2024
Ethical concerns in aging research: perspectives of global frontline researchers.
Article in Science China. Life sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and academic writing questionnaire (AI-AWQ): development and validation among medical students' experiences using exploratory factor analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Biomarkers of ageing of humans and non-human primates.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2025Review
- The X-Age Project to construct a Chinese aging clock.Nature aging · 2025Review
- Single-nucleus transcriptomics decodes the link between aging and lumbar disc herniation.Protein & cell · 2025Article
- Gene therapy strategies for aging intervention.Cell insight · 2025Review
- CRISPR screening uncovers nucleolar RPL22 as a heterochromatin destabilizer and senescence driver.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the ethical landscape of aging research amid the increasing global focus on extending the human lifespan and health span. Our global survey of 180 researchers across 38 jurisdictions revealed divergent perceptions of aging, a consensus regarding the feasibility of delaying aging, and multiple perspectives regarding lifespan extension. The present findings underscore a paradigm shift toward inclusive and ethically sound research, emphasizing the need for an approach that strikes a balance between basic and clinical research. In addition, this study highlighted key ethical concerns in aging research, including the effects of misleading advertising, potential inequality in access to aging interventions, and risks pertaining to the extrapolation of research findings from lower-model organisms to humans. The insights presented in this paper call for an integrated approach for overcoming the complex ethical and societal challenges in aging research to ensure responsible and equitable advancements in this burgeoning field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39034350What 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.