Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41971648›Full record

ArticleOpen research Europe2024

Ethical Impact Assessment of Sharing Nanosafety Data.

Ineke Malsch, Egon Willighagen, Candida F Sánchez Burmester, Cyrus Mody

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Open research Europe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

4 authors.

Ineke MalschMalsch TechnoValuation, Utrecht, PO Box 455, 3500 AL, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2128-0609
Egon WillighagenTranslational Genomics, Universiteit Maastricht School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht,Universiteitssingel 40, Limburg, 6229 ER, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286
Candida F Sánchez BurmesterMaastricht University Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Maastricht, Limburg, Grote Gracht 90-92 6211 SZ, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1286-790X
Cyrus ModyMaastricht University Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Maastricht, Limburg, Grote Gracht 90-92 6211 SZ, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5266-5878

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decades of research on environmental, health and safety impacts of nanomaterials have generated large amounts of nanosafety data, but not all data are available online following the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) principles. This lack of FAIR data delays progress in regulatory research, needed by regulators to develop evidence-based policies. In this context, researchers collaborating in the EU NanoSafety Cluster ( www.nanosafetycluster.eu) engaged in a discussion on the ethical impacts related to (not) sharing nanosafety data. Screening the potential ethical impacts suggested that

Indexed as

common goodenvironmentequalityethicsFAIR datahealthlibertiesmisuseNanosafety dataopen access

Identifiers

PMID41971648
PMCPMC13062766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.