ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Public acceptance of genome editing in Saudi Arabia is driven by therapeutic benefit despite limited awareness.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public knowledge, attitudes, and ethical views on CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing for genetic diseases in Taif, Saudi Arabia.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome editing technologies are transforming precision medicine and rare disease therapeutics; however, their responsible clinical integration depends on public awareness, ethical acceptance, and trust in regulatory oversight. Evidence from culturally diverse populations remains limited, particularly in regions undergoing rapid investment in genomic medicine. A large nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted using a structured, self-administered electronic questionnaire distributed to adults aged 18 years and older. The instrument assessed demographic characteristics, awareness of genome editing, perceived benefits and risks, ethical concerns, and acceptance of genome editing applications. Descriptive statistics, correlation analyses, and regression analyses were performed to examine factors associated with acceptance. A total of 1,712 participants completed the survey. Fewer than half of respondents reported prior awareness of genome editing, indicating limited baseline familiarity. Support for therapeutic applications was high, particularly when interventions were framed as treatments for serious or life-threatening conditions. Favourable attitudes and perceived clinical benefit were strongly associated with acceptance, while perceived risk demonstrated a modest negative association. Greater awareness was associated with increased ethical caution. Trust in national regulatory frameworks significantly strengthened confidence in gene therapy applications. These findings indicate a relatively supportive public perspective toward therapeutic genome editing in Saudi Arabia, particularly when its use is framed within appropriate ethical and regulatory boundaries. By providing population level evidence from an underrepresented region undergoing rapid genomic development, this study offers insights that may inform culturally responsive policy, public engagement, and responsible clinical translation of genome editing technologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.