Journal, university investigations launched into gene-editing death following Science-Retraction Watch reporting
Nature is investigating concerns surrounding a paper at the heart of a news story published last week on the death of a 6-year-old girl following a gene therapy treatment in China. The paper, published in February by a team led by neuroscientist Zilong Qiu of Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine in China, described … Continue reading Journal, university investigations launched into gene-editing death following Science-Retraction Watch reporting
Record details
Published: 30 July 2026
Source: Retraction Watch
Category: News
Topics: Children & education · Finance, VC & PE
Retrieved: 31 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Weekend reads: University and journal investigating gene-editing death; ADA ‘must take accountability’; psychedelic therapy paper faces retraction
Retraction Watch · 1 August 2026
Exclusive: A couple paid more than $800,000 for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died, and it wasn’t made public
Retraction Watch · 23 July 2026
Enabling and Inhibitory Pathways of University Students' Willingness to Disclose AI Use: A Cognition-Affect-Conation Perspective
arXiv · 23 April 2026
Enabling and Inhibitory Pathways of Students' AI Use Concealment Intention in Higher Education: Evidence from SEM and fsQCA
arXiv · 13 April 2026
When AI Meets Early Childhood Education: Large Language Models as Assessment Teammates in Chinese Preschools
arXiv · 25 March 2026
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education
OpenAlex · 9 June 2023
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (30 July 2026), “Journal, university investigations launched into gene-editing death following Science-Retraction Watch reporting,” evidence record 15071, https://ethics.ai/record/15071 (originally published by Retraction Watch).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.