Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39680332›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2025

Religion Welcome Here: A Pluriversal Approach to Religion and Global Bioethics.

N S Jecker, C A Atuire, V Ravitsky, M Ghaly, V Vaswani, T C Voo

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. 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. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

N S JeckerAfrican Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa. nsjecker@uw.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5642-748X
C A AtuireDepartment of Philosophy and Classics, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0001-6825-6916
V RavitskyDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7080-8801
M GhalyResearch Center for Islamic Legislation & Ethics, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Ar-Rayyan, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0001-5577-6525
V VaswaniCentre for Ethics and Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Yenepoya University, Mangaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0001-8914-0795
T C VooOffice of Ethics in Healthcare, SingHealth, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4757-7328

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper sets forth and defends a pluriversal approach to religion in the context of an increasingly global bioethics. Section I introduces a pluriversal view as a normative technique for engaging across difference. A normative pluriversal approach sets five constraints: civility, change from within, justice, non-domination, and tolerance. Section II applies a pluriversal approach to religion. It argues that this approach is epistemically just, recognizes diverse standpoints, and represents a productive, preferred, way to tackle global bioethics concerns. Section II also considers an opposing viewpoint, which holds that religious perspectives have no place in bioethics. We show that this viewpoint would have adverse effects on bioethics publishing, conferencing, and training programmes. The paper concludes (in Section III) that bioethicists should engage with people who hold different worldviews, including religious worldviews, and should do so in accordance with pluriversal ethical constraints.

Indexed as

Bioethical IssuesBioethicsCultural DiversityInternationalityReligionHumansSocial JusticeEpistemic justiceGlobal bioethicsPluriversal viewPublic reasonReligion

Identifiers

PMID39680332
PMCPMC12263729

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.