IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0328923.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mining and quantitative evaluation of the laboratory biosafety policy in China

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng Xiang
  • Qing Zhu
  • Jinqing Wen
  • Lixiang Xie
  • Rongrong Hao
  • Xueting Qiu
  • Fei Zhu

Abstract

Policies play a pivotal role in guiding and overseeing laboratory biosafety management. To ensure that laboratory biosafety management is underpinned by scientifically robust and well-founded policies, an analysis and evaluation of existing policies were conducted. The object was to identify their merits and limitations, thereby offering references for future policy development. The qualitative and quantitative analysis were employed to explore 137 central-level policies issued in China as of April 30, 2024. Additionally, based on policy evaluation theory, a PMC index model was established to evaluate 11 representative laboratory biosafety policies. The results showed that: Firstly, these policies, promulgated by 24 distinct departments, spanned three regulatory tiers: laws, regulations, and administrative rules. Secondly, content analysis revealed three primary aspects: (1) management systems, (2) facility, equipment and containment barrier, and (3) operational technical standards. Thirdly, the average PMC index of the 11 policies was 5.05. Specifically, two policies were deemed excellent, eight policies were acceptable and one was inadequate. The low score was mainly attributed to three indicators: policy level, policy timeliness, and policy content. To sum up, laboratory biosafety policies in China were generally rational and comprehensive. However, insufficient collaboration among departments during policy formulation, as well as the need to improve policy continuity were identified. To enhance biosafety laboratory management, four recommendations are proposed: 1. Strengthen communication among different departments; 2.Optimize the policy formulation process; 3. Enhance supervision of biosafety level 1 and 2 (BSL-1/2) laboratories; 4. Harnessing the power of industry associations.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng Xiang & Qing Zhu & Jinqing Wen & Lixiang Xie & Rongrong Hao & Xueting Qiu & Fei Zhu, 2025. "Mining and quantitative evaluation of the laboratory biosafety policy in China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(8), pages 1-15, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0328923
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0328923
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0328923
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0328923&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0328923?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0328923. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.