Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40689230›Full record

ArticleSynthetic and systems biotechnology2025

From consultors to collaborators - An SOP for advancing ethics engagement in science.

Varsha Aravind Paleri, Kristien Hens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Synthetic and systems biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Imagining an ethics for synthetic biology.Frontiers in genetics · 2026
    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

2 authors.

Varsha Aravind PaleriCentre for Ethics, Department of Philosophy, Universiteit Antwerpen, Stadscampus, 2000, Antwerpen, Belgium.
Kristien HensCentre for Ethics, Department of Philosophy, Universiteit Antwerpen, Stadscampus, 2000, Antwerpen, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthetic Biology (SynBio) is an interdisciplinary field that tackles global challenges in healthcare, sustainability, food production, among others. However, it also presents critical ethical concerns, including biosecurity, justice, and the unintended consequences of research biases. Addressing these concerns requires timely and systematic ethical evaluation. Conventional approaches often relegate ethics to an external, procedural role rather than embedding it within the core of scientific inquiry, leading to delayed engagement and associated challenges. This article introduces a structured, stage-wise Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to support the systematic integration of ethics into scientific research. Particularly beneficial for early-career researchers and ethicists, this framework offers a practical method for incorporating ethical reflection throughout the research process.

Indexed as

Embedded ethicsEthicsEthics in scienceSynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID40689230
PMCPMC12271606

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.