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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34406039)

  • 1. The DNA-Dialogue: A Broad Societal Dialogue About Human Germline Genome Editing in the Netherlands.
    van Baalen S; Gouman J; Houtman D; Vijlbrief B; Riedijk S; Verhoef P
    CRISPR J; 2021 Aug; 4(4):616-625. PubMed ID: 34406039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Changes in opinions about human germline gene editing as a result of the Dutch DNA-dialogue project.
    Houtman D; Vijlbrief B; Polak M; Pot J; Verhoef P; Cornel M; Riedijk S
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2023 Apr; 31(4):409-416. PubMed ID: 35551502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Why Human Germline Editing is More Problematic than Selecting Between Embryos: Ethically Considering Intergenerational Relationships.
    Rehmann-Sutter C
    New Bioeth; 2018 Apr; 24(1):9-25. PubMed ID: 29529985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. How Australia's Policymakers Can Ethically Approach Human Germline Genome Editing Technology.
    Mangiapane M; Foong P
    J Law Med; 2022 Aug; 29(3):740-759. PubMed ID: 36056664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Germ-Inating Solutions or Gene-Rating Problems: An Islamic Perspective on Human Germline Gene Editing.
    Lala I
    J Relig Health; 2020 Aug; 59(4):1855-1869. PubMed ID: 30778792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Germline genome modification through novel political, ethical, and social lenses.
    Xafis V; Schaefer GO; Labude MK; Zhu Y; Holm S; Foo RS; Lai PS; Chadwick R
    PLoS Genet; 2021 Sep; 17(9):e1009741. PubMed ID: 34499641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The need to set explicit goals for human germline gene editing public dialogues.
    Geuverink WP; Houtman D; Retel Helmrich IRA; van Baalen S; van Beers BC; van El CG; Henneman L; Kasprzak MD; Arets D; Riedijk SR;
    J Community Genet; 2024 Jun; 15(3):259-265. PubMed ID: 38720104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The European Court of Human Rights and the Emergence of Human Germline Genome Editing.
    Spaander MM
    Eur J Health Law; 2022 Apr; 29(3-5):458-483. PubMed ID: 37582535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. CRISPR/Cas gene editing in the human germline.
    Bekaert B; Boel A; Cosemans G; De Witte L; Menten B; Heindryckx B
    Semin Cell Dev Biol; 2022 Nov; 131():93-107. PubMed ID: 35305903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Heritable Human Genome Editing: The Public Engagement Imperative.
    Adashi EY; Burgess MM; Burall S; Cohen IG; Fleck LM; Harris J; Holm S; Lafont C; Moreno JD; Neblo MA; Niemeyer SJ; Rowe EJ; Scheufele DA; Tetsa PF; Vayena E; Watermeyer RP; Fung A
    CRISPR J; 2020 Dec; 3(6):434-439. PubMed ID: 33346718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Making sense of heritable human genome editing: Scientific and ethical considerations.
    Greenfield A
    Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci; 2021; 182():1-28. PubMed ID: 34175039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Germline genome editing: Moratorium, hard law, or an informed adaptive consensus?
    Kaan T; Xafis V; Schaefer GO; Zhu Y; Labude MK; Chadwick R
    PLoS Genet; 2021 Sep; 17(9):e1009742. PubMed ID: 34499642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The implications of the gender-based prohibitions relating to human germline genome editing in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act.
    Kaur A
    Reprod Biomed Online; 2021 Feb; 42(2):457-462. PubMed ID: 33293222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Responsible governance of human germline genome editing in China†.
    Peng Y; Lv J; Ding L; Gong X; Zhou Q
    Biol Reprod; 2022 Jul; 107(1):261-268. PubMed ID: 35640230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Survey on the perception of germline genome editing among the general public in Japan.
    Uchiyama M; Nagai A; Muto K
    J Hum Genet; 2018 Jun; 63(6):745-748. PubMed ID: 29545588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Germline genome-editing research and its socioethical implications.
    Ishii T
    Trends Mol Med; 2015 Aug; 21(8):473-81. PubMed ID: 26078206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Q methodology study on divergent perspectives on CRISPR-Cas9 in the Netherlands.
    Schuijff M; De Jong MDT; Dijkstra AM
    BMC Med Ethics; 2021 Apr; 22(1):48. PubMed ID: 33902573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. "What if" should precede "whether" and "how" in the social conversation around human germline gene editing.
    Houtman D; Geuverink W; Helmrich IRAR; Vijlbrief B; Cornel M; Riedijk S
    J Community Genet; 2023 Aug; 14(4):371-375. PubMed ID: 37326787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Vulnerability and the Ethics of Human Germline Genome Editing.
    Labude MK; Xafis V; Lai PS; Mills C
    CRISPR J; 2022 Jun; 5(3):358-363. PubMed ID: 35580124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reexamining the Ethics of Human Germline Editing in the Wake of Scandal.
    Meagher KM; Allyse MA; Master Z; Sharp RR
    Mayo Clin Proc; 2020 Feb; 95(2):330-338. PubMed ID: 32029087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.