Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42475124›Full record

ArticleThe Hastings Center report

Filling the Network Gap in Research Ethics: Analyzing Ethical Issues at Scale in Big Team Science.

Susan M Wolf, Gillian H Roehrig, Timothy L Pruett, Korkut Uygun, Adam Koch, Claire Colby McVan, Evelyn Brister, Shawneequa L Callier, Alexander M Capron, James F Childress and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Hastings Center report. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

15 authors.

Susan M Wolf
Gillian H Roehrig
Timothy L Pruett
Korkut Uygun
Adam Koch
Claire Colby McVan
Evelyn Brister
Shawneequa L Callier
Alexander M Capron
James F Childress
Rosario Isasi
Andrew D Maynard
Kenneth A Oye
Paul B Thompson
Terrence R Tiersch

Funding

Minnesota's Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life SciencesNational Science Foundation 2220611NSF Engineering Research Center for Advanced Technologies for the Preservation of Biological Systems (ATP-Bio) 1941543
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scientific research increasingly involves large, multidisciplinary teams networked across multiple institutions to develop new technologies. Despite the rise of complex research networks and big team science, there has been too little analysis to date of the ethical challenges facing these networks. The extensive literature on the ethical issues confronting individual researchers and small teams (the microlevel) and on the larger societal challenges flowing from research and new technology (the macrolevel) leaves a troubling gap in between, at the mesolevel of the research network involved in big team science. Yet the ability of complex networks to conduct research ethically-which is essential if the results are to be deemed reliable and trustworthy-depends on recognizing the ethical issues that emerge at this intermediate network level, identifying the values that should guide networks in addressing those issues, and equipping research leaders to build a culture supporting the ethical conduct of research across the laboratories and institutions that comprise the network. This paper calls out the problem, analyzing the gap and recommending next steps.

Indexed as

Ethics, ResearchHumansResearch Personnelengineering ethicsnetwork ethicsresearch ethicsresearch networkresponsible conduct of researchteam science

Identifiers

PMID42475124
PMCPMC13384082

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.