Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42028095›Full record

ArticleEpigenetics communications2026

Visions, expectations, and reservations in epigenetic editing: towards responsible innovation.

Sophie van Baalen, Thomas Verra, Phil Macnaghten, Eline Bunnik, Michelle Gjl Habets

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Epigenetics communications, 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

5 authors.

Sophie van BaalenRathenau Instituut, Den Haag, 2593 HW The Netherlands.
Thomas VerraRathenau Instituut, Den Haag, 2593 HW The Netherlands.
Phil MacnaghtenKnowledge, Technology and Innovation Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, 6706KN The Netherlands.
Eline BunnikDepartment of Public Health, Programme Medical Ethics, Philosophy and History of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 GD The Netherlands.
Michelle Gjl HabetsRathenau Instituut, Den Haag, 2593 HW The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Science and Technology Studies (STS), scholars highlight the guiding role of expectations, promises, visions, and assumptions of scientists, shaping the development of research fields and technologies. Making these expectations and visions explicit, opens them to reflection and adjustment by diverse stakeholders, fostering more responsible and inclusive technological innovation. In this paper, we study the visions and expectations of scientists in academia and in industry (

Indexed as

Epigenetic editingEpigenetics and societyResponsible research and innovationTechnology assessment

Identifiers

PMID42028095
PMCPMC13099719

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.