ReviewFrontiers in genetics2025
Conceptualizing the public good for genomics in the global South: a cross-disciplinary roundtable dialogue.
Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision medicine in low-income settings and small island developing states.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2026Review
- Geneticization in the genomic era: a scoping review of ethical, clinical, and sociocultural transformations.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the Human Genome Project, initiatives to genetically sequence and profile populations around the world have expanded rapidly. The rationales guiding this expansion are diverse: on the one hand, the concentration of genetic technologies in the global North threatens to widen the yawning gaps in healthcare available in advanced versus developing nations. On the other, more 'genetic diversity' in global databases can reveal new points of genetic variation associated with health or disease. This promises to pave the way to a more personalized medicine of the future-more powerful and prosperous, with tailored prevention regimens and genetic treatments targeted to every individual's specific genetic vulnerabilities. These rationales are advanced to claim a public good case for genomics. However, the expansion of genomics to underserved populations in the global South has provoked many sociopolitical and ethical challenges. Critics have pointed to the inevitable entanglement of genomics with private commercial interests. These concerns are overlaid on deeper anxieties stemming from global asymmetries in scientific and technological power, and historical patterns of value extraction from colonized and marginalized populations. How then do we disentangle the public good? How do we build a genomics science that is just and equitable for the vast majority of the world? This conversation convenes leading genomics practitioners and critical science studies scholars to address these questions. We draw on an ongoing transdisciplinary dialogue, integrating the natural and social sciences, and bring together perspectives and scholars from the global North and South. Our aim is to cultivate a more holistic and grounded engagement with the scientific and political challenges we face, to truly understand the requirements of a genomics that centers the question of justice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.