ReviewNature genetics2025
The LISTEN principles for genetic sequence data governance and database engineering.
Review in Nature 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.
- How can biological databases support the new UN mechanism for benefit-sharing from digital sequence information?Scientific data · 2026Article
- The Role of Data in Public Health and Health Innovation: Perspectives on Social Determinants of Health, Community-Based Data Approaches, and AI.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Several international legal agreements include an 'access and benefit-sharing' (ABS) mechanism that attaches obligations to the use of genetic sequence data. These agreements are frequently subject to critique on the grounds that ABS is either fundamentally incompatible with the principles of open science, or technically challenging to implement in open scientific databases. Here, we argue that these critiques arise from a misinterpretation of the principles of open science and that both considerations can be addressed by a set of simple principles that link database engineering and governance. We introduce a checklist of six database design considerations, LISTEN: licensed, identified, supervised, transparent, enforced and non-exclusive, which can be readily adopted by both new and existing platforms participating in ABS systems. We also highlight how these principles can act in concert with familiar principles of open science, such as findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR) data sharing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40721529What 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.