Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39398640›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024

Bridging biosafety and biosecurity gaps: DURC and ePPP policy insights from U.S. institutions.

David R Gillum, An Tran, Jennifer Fletcher, Kathleen M Vogel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Evolution of United States Governance Policies for Research Using Pathogens with Enhanced Pandemic Potential.Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Why implementation gaps could undermine synthetic nucleic acid oversight.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
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.

David R GillumSchool for the Future of Innovation and Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.
An TranEnvironmental Science and Health, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, United States.
Jennifer FletcherAccountability, Assessment and Research, Chandler Unified School District, Chandler, AZ, United States.
Kathleen M VogelSchool for the Future of Innovation and Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.

Funding

SOS:BIO - Assessing U.S. Biosafety and Biosecurity Compliance for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Research and Dual Use Research of ConcernR01GM155913 · NIGMS · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI David Gillum, Kathleen Vogel · 2024 to 2026
$823k
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM155913
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Overview: This study provides empirical data on the knowledge and practices of biosafety and biosecurity professionals and researchers involved in research on enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (ePPPs) and Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) within various U.S. sectors. The goal is to improve public health interventions and oversight for DURC and ePPP, contributing valuable insights for policy development. A notable finding was the association between larger biosafety/biosecurity teams and a higher likelihood of conducting high-risk biological research. Methods: A survey of 541 biosafety and biosecurity professionals was conducted between March 8 and 10 April 2024, with results analyzed using SAS at a significance level of 0.05. The study received approval from the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at Arizona State University and the University of Nevada, Reno. Results: Government organizations were more likely to conduct DURC compared to other sectors (e.g., Academic, Commercial, Consulting). Public institutions reviewed more experiments outside the scope of the U.S. DURC Policy than private for-profit institutions. Institutions with larger biosafety/biosecurity teams reported greater research activity and more effective non-compliance reporting mechanisms (e.g., anonymous hotlines, reporting forms). Additionally, financial support and the challenges of policy implementation varied significantly across sectors. Discussion: The findings emphasize the need for appropriate staffing and resource allocation for high-risk biosafety and biosecurity research. A differentiated regulatory approach and equitable distribution of resources are essential for effective oversight. Moreover, robust non-compliance reporting systems are critical to mitigating the risks associated with DURC and ePPP research.

Indexed as

biosafetybiosafety surveybiosecuritydual use research of concern (DURC)enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (ePPP)non-compliance reportingorganizational safetyrisk management

Identifiers

PMID39398640
PMCPMC11467424

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.