Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39980970›Full record

ArticleNeuroethics2025

Data Hazards as An Ethical Toolkit for Neuroscience.

Susana Román García, Ceilidh Welsh, Nina H Di Cara, David C Sterratt, Nicola Romanò, Melanie I Stefan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Data hazards in synthetic biology.Synthetic biology (Oxford, England) · 2024
    Review
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.

Susana Román GarcíaCentre for Discovery Brain Sciences, College of Medicine & Veterinary Medicine, Biomedical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0009-0004-6967-7754
Ceilidh WelshDepartment of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7332-7392
Nina H Di CaraSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6179-1067
David C SterrattInstitute for Adaptive and Neural Computation, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9092-9099
Nicola RomanòCentre for Discovery Brain Sciences, College of Medicine & Veterinary Medicine, Biomedical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1316-8940
Melanie I StefanCentre for Discovery Brain Sciences, College of Medicine & Veterinary Medicine, Biomedical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6086-7357

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Data Hazards framework (Zelenka, Di Cara, & Contributors, 2024) is intended to encourage thinking about the ethical implications of data science projects. It takes the form of community-designed data hazard labels, similar to warning labels on chemicals, that can encourage reflection and discussion on what ethical risks are associated with a project and how they can be mitigated. In this article, we explain how the Data Hazards framework can apply to neuroscience. We demonstrate how the hazard labels can be applied to one of our own projects, on the computational modelling of postsynaptic mechanisms. Graphical Abstract: Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12152-024-09580-3.

Indexed as

Data HazardsEthical labelsEthical toolkit

Identifiers

PMID39980970
PMCPMC11835915

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.