Citation

Resnik DB, Barner DD, Dinse GE. Biosecur. Bioterror. 2011; 9(1): 49-54.

Affiliation

David B. Resnik, JD, PhD, is a Bioethicist, Ethics Program; Dionne D. Barner, JD, MA, is a Summers of Discovery Intern, Ethics Program; and Gregg E. Dinse, ScD, is a Senior Investigator, Biostatistics Branch; all are at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences , National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, Mary Ann Liebert Publishers)

DOI

10.1089/bsp.2010.0067

PMID

21395429

PMCID

PMC3063694

Abstract

To address biosecurity issues, government agencies, academic institutions, and professional societies have developed policies concerning the publication of "dual-use" biomedical research-that is, research that could be readily applied to cause significant harm to the public, the environment, or national security. We conducted an e-mail survey of life science journals to determine the percentage that have a dual-use policy. Of the 155 journals that responded to our survey (response rate 39%), only 7.7% stated that they had a written dual-use policy and only 5.8% said they had experience reviewing dual-use research in the past 5 years. Among the potential predictors we investigated, the one most highly associated with a journal having a written dual-use policy was membership in the Nature Publishing Group (positive association). When considered individually, both previous experience with reviewing dual-use research and the journal's impact factor appeared to be positively associated with having a written dual-use policy, but only the former remained significant after adjusting for publishing group. Although preventing the misuse of scientific research for terrorist or criminal purposes is an important concern, few biomedical journals have dual-use review policies. Journals that are likely to review research that raises potential dual-use concerns should consider developing dual-use policies.

Language: en