MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206565140 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511642364

Gene Transfer and the Ethics of First-in-Human Research

2009· book· en· W4206565140 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Kimmelman

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Psychological interventionEngineering ethicsInformed consentDisadvantagedMedical researchInclusion (mineral)Clinical trialEthical issuesGene transferPolitical scienceMedicinePsychologyAlternative medicineEngineeringLawSocial psychologyComputer scienceBiologyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human gene transfer is widely regarded as one of the most promising technologies for the treatment of a variety of disorders, but it presents practitioners with a variety of difficult ethical questions. Gene Transfer and the Ethics of First-in-Human Research examines the ethical and policy dimensions of testing interventions in human beings for the first time. The book discusses the difficult ethical challenges that arise from attempting to translate laboratory discoveries into clinical applications. These range from which available techniques to use, when to initiate human testing, questions of consent, expectation in public arenas, how to define acceptable risk, and the inclusion of vulnerable or disadvantaged subjects in early phase trials. This book is relevant to ethicists, legal practitioners, policy makers, geneticists and clinicians involved in clinical trials of new medical interventions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207