• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Public Health >Why has Not There been More Research of Concern?
【24h】

Why has Not There been More Research of Concern?

机译：为什么没有更多的关注研究？

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Amid the renewed concern in the last several years about the potential for life science research to facilitate the spread of disease, a central plank of the policy response has been to enact processes for assessing the risks and benefits of “research of concern.” The recent controversy regarding a proposed redaction of work on the modification of a H5N1 avian influenza virus is perhaps the most prominent such instance. And yet, a noteworthy feature of this case is its exceptionalness. In the last 10 years, life science publishers, funders, and labs have rarely identified any research as “of concern,” let alone proposed censors. This article takes this experience with risk assessment as an invitation for reflection. Reasons for the low number of instances of concern are related to how the biosecurity dimensions of the life sciences are identified, how they are described, how the assessments of benefits and risks are undertaken, how value considerations do and do not enter into assessments, as well as the lack of information on the outcomes of reviews. This argument builds on such considerations to examine the limitations and implications of the risk–benefit experiment of concern framing, the politics of expertise as well as the prospects for alternative responses.
机译：在过去几年中，人们对生命科学研究促进疾病传播的潜力再次表示关注，而政策对策的中心内容是制定评估“关注研究”的风险和收益的流程。最近关于拟议的修改H5N1禽流感病毒工作的争议引起争议。然而，这种情况的一个值得注意的特征是它的特殊性。在过去的10年中，生命科学出版商，资助者和实验室很少将任何研究视为“令人关注的”，更不用说提议的审查员了。本文将这种风险评估的经验作为反思的邀请。引起关注的案例数量少的原因与如何确定生命科学的生物安全性维度，如何对其进行描述，如何进行收益和风险评估，价值考虑因素如何进行评估以及不进行评估有关。以及缺乏有关审查结果的信息。该论点建立在这些考虑的基础之上，以检验关注框架的风险-收益实验，专业知识的政治性以及替代性反应的前景的局限性和含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号