Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39164608›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2025

Navigating the Nexus of Bioethics and Geopolitics: Implications for Global Health Security and Scientific Collaboration.

Alexandra Klimovich-Mickael, Mariusz Sacharczuk, Michel Edwar Mickael

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2025. 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
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

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

3 authors.

Alexandra Klimovich-MickaelPM Research Center, Väpnaregatan 22, 58649, Linköping, Sweden.
Mariusz SacharczukInstitute of Genetics and Animal Biotechnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Ul. Postepu 36A, 05-552, Jastrzębiec, Magdalenka, Poland.
Michel Edwar MickaelInstitute of Genetics and Animal Biotechnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Ul. Postepu 36A, 05-552, Jastrzębiec, Magdalenka, Poland. m.mickael@igbzpan.pl.ORCID 0000-0002-4186-4900

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioethics plays a pivotal role in guiding ethical decision-making within the realm of medical research and healthcare. However, the influence of geopolitics on bioethical considerations, particularly regarding bioweapons research, remains an underexplored area. This study delves into the uncharted territory of how international political interests can intersect with bioethical principles, potentially shaping collaborative efforts and global health policies related to bioweapons research. Through a hypothetical scenario involving a hypothetical pathogen, a collaborative effort between unspecified countries, we examine the implications of such cooperation on global health governance, with a specific focus on bioweapons research. Ethical dilemmas surrounding responsible research, potential risks and benefits, equitable distribution of findings, and biosafety measures are explored. This analysis underscores the importance of transparent and responsible practices in bioweapons research amidst geopolitical tensions. By striking a balance between national interests and international solidarity, we advocate for robust bioethical frameworks to navigate such collaborations for the collective well-being of humanity and to mitigate potential risks associated with bioweapons research.

Indexed as

Bioethical IssuesBioethicsBiomedical ResearchCooperative BehaviorGlobal HealthInternational CooperationPoliticsHealth PolicyHumansBioethicsGeopoliticsPublic healthViruses

Identifiers

PMID39164608
PMCPMC12222238

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.