These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28851444)
21. The Impact of CRISPR/Cas9-Based Genomic Engineering on Biomedical Research and Medicine. Go DE; Stottmann RW Curr Mol Med; 2016; 16(4):343-52. PubMed ID: 26980700 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Everything in moderation, even hype: learning from vaccine controversies to strike a balance with CRISPR. Benston S J Med Ethics; 2017 Dec; 43(12):819-823. PubMed ID: 28473627 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The Hope and Hype of CRISPR-Cas9 Genome Editing: A Review. Musunuru K JAMA Cardiol; 2017 Aug; 2(8):914-919. PubMed ID: 28614576 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Public Acceptability of Gene Therapy and Gene Editing for Human Use: A Systematic Review. Delhove J; Osenk I; Prichard I; Donnelley M Hum Gene Ther; 2020 Jan; 31(1-2):20-46. PubMed ID: 31802714 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Hype and public trust in science. Master Z; Resnik DB Sci Eng Ethics; 2013 Jun; 19(2):321-35. PubMed ID: 22045550 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. CRISPR/Cas9 facilitates genomic editing for large-scale functional studies in pluripotent stem cell cultures. Li XF; Zhou YW; Cai PF; Fu WC; Wang JH; Chen JY; Yang QN Hum Genet; 2019 Dec; 138(11-12):1217-1225. PubMed ID: 31606751 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Donors, authors, and owners: how is genomic citizen science addressing interests in research outputs? Guerrini CJ; Lewellyn M; Majumder MA; Trejo M; Canfield I; McGuire AL BMC Med Ethics; 2019 Nov; 20(1):84. PubMed ID: 31752834 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. A virtual deliberative public engagement study on heritable genome editing among South Africans: Study protocol. Thaldar D; Townsend B; Botes M; Shozi B; Pillay S PLoS One; 2021; 16(8):e0256097. PubMed ID: 34411176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Gene Editing in Humans: Towards a Global and Inclusive Debate for Responsible Research. de Lecuona I; Casado M; Marfany G; Lopez Baroni M; Escarrabill M Yale J Biol Med; 2017 Dec; 90(4):673-681. PubMed ID: 29259532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. What we know about effective public engagement on CRISPR and beyond. Scheufele DA; Krause NM; Freiling I; Brossard D Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2021 Jun; 118(22):. PubMed ID: 34050014 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Research, engagement and public bioethics: promoting socially robust science. Pickersgill MD J Med Ethics; 2011 Nov; 37(11):698-701. PubMed ID: 21673017 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Should germline genome editing be allowed? The effect of treatment characteristics on public acceptability. van Dijke I; van Wely M; Berkman BE; Bredenoord AL; Henneman L; Vliegenthart R; Repping S; Hendriks S Hum Reprod; 2021 Jan; 36(2):465-478. PubMed ID: 33242333 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Can the Thought of Teilhard de Chardin Carry Us Past Current Contentious Discussions of Gene Editing Technologies? Šuleková M; Fitzgerald KT Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2019 Jan; 28(1):62-75. PubMed ID: 30570465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A Crispr Future for Gene-Editing Regulation: a Proposal for an Updated Biotechnology Regulatory System in an Era of Human Genomic Editing. Tomlinson T Fordham Law Rev; 2018 Oct; 87(1):437-83. PubMed ID: 30296034 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Public consultation in ethics: an experiment in representative ethics. Burgess MM J Bioeth Inq; 2004; 1(1):4-13. PubMed ID: 16025591 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]