Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41843394›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026

Exploring Patient Organization Involvement in Stem Cell Research: Insights from the Lifeworld.

Edilene Lopes, Rachel Ankeny, Dan Santos, Mengqi Hu, Tess Whitton, Michail Ivanov, Joan Leach, Dianne Nicol, Christine Wells

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Edilene LopesSchool of Humanities, Adelaide University, Napier Building, Level 7, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia. edilene.lopesmcinnes@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2891-4635
Rachel AnkenyWageningen University, Hollandseweg 1(Building 201), 6706, KN, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Dan SantosAustralian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, Australian National University, 42a Linnaeus Way, Acton, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Mengqi HuStem Cell Systems, Anatomy and Physiology, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Room 2.11, Level 2, Kenneth Myer Building, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Tess WhittonMelbourne Law School, University of Melbourne, 185 Pelham Street, Carlton, VIC, 3053, Australia.
Michail IvanovSchool of Humanities, Adelaide University, Napier Building, Level 7, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia.
Joan LeachAustralian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, Australian National University, 42a Linnaeus Way, Acton, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Dianne NicolFaculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 89, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia.
Christine WellsStem Cell Systems, Anatomy and Physiology, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Room 2.11, Level 2, Kenneth Myer Building, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia.

Funding

Department of Health and Aged Care, Australian Government MRF2008807
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines the role of patient organizations as mediators between patients and researchers in stem cell research in Australia. We conducted semi-structured interviews with stem cell researchers and patient organization representatives as part of a broader project to deepen public understanding and foster more robust scientific practices in stem cell-based research and therapies. We used Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action as our theoretical framework to explore the relationships between patient organizations and researchers. Using this framework allowed the identification of two different ways of conceptualizing health and illness-one based on patients' experiences, which we call "the lifeworld," and another grounded on researchers', health professionals', and policymakers' professional perspectives, which we call "the rational system." We found that the different conceptualizations identified influenced the interactions between patients and researchers (and other professionals involved in the healthcare system). Patient organizations, then, act as articulators of patients' viewpoints in this scenario, which can have advantages and disadvantages. We also found that researchers need to develop less transactional forms of communication with these organizations and that policymakers and regulators could benefit from developing guidelines to encourage researchers to use diverse strategies to engage more meaningfully with patients at individual and organizational levels.

Indexed as

CommunicationPatient ParticipationResearch PersonnelStem Cell ResearchAustraliaHumansAustraliaBioethicsHabermasPatient involvementPatient organizationsStem cell

Identifiers

PMID41843394
PMCPMC13645905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.