ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2025
The Genetic Data Market: Institutional Governance of Academic/Industry Research Partnerships for the Public Good.
Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- When genomics companies act as biobanks: governance challenges in an era of genomic assetization.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- When 'More Isn't More': The Normative and Practical Case for Improving Genetic Data Infrastructure.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2025Article
- Differences Between Government, Consortium, and Private Database Stewards Impacting the Genomic Data Market: A Survey of U.S. Academic Genetic Researchers.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The Trump Administration's cuts to research funding and opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion is destabilizing academic research. These attacks coincide with pointed government support for the private sector. But the conceptualization of academic versus private sector health research has historically been a false binary. Drawing on mixed methods research, this paper examines the genomic data market as an example of advantages and challenges of commercializing academic expertise. It also highlights the structural downsides of researchers individually navigating industry partnerships. While academia is currently being put in the unenviable position of being more likely to need the private sector to conduct research, with less federal funding to offer in exchange, structural pain points have existed for decades. This is an opportunity for academia to harness its powers of expertise and collective action to develop institutional policy to ensure academic/industry research is beneficial to the public health and diverse patient communities.
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.