Search

Neurological conditions are the leading cause of disability and mortality combined, demanding innovative, scalable, and sustainable solutions. Brain health has become a global priority with adoption of the World Health Organization's Intersectoral Global Action Plan in 2022. Simultaneously, rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) are revolutionizing neurological research and practice. This scoping review of 66 original articles explores the value of AI in neurology and brain health, systematizing the landscape for emergent clinical opportunities and future trends across the care trajectory: prevention, risk stratification, early detection, diagnosis, management, and rehabilitation. AI's potential to advance personalized precision neurology and global brain health directives hinges on resolving core challenges across four pillars—models, data, feasibility/equity, and regulation/innovation—through concerted pursuit of targeted recommendations. Paramount actions include swift, ethical, equity-focused integration of novel technologies into clinical workflows, mitigating data-related issues, counteracting digital inequity gaps, and establishing robust governance frameworks balancing safety and innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As we approach an era of potentially widespread consumer neurotechnology, scholars and organizations worldwide have started to raise concerns about the data privacy issues these devices will present. Notably absent in these discussions is empirical evidence about how the public perceives that same information. This article presents the results of a nationwide survey on public perceptions of brain data, to inform discussions of law and policy regarding brain data governance. The survey reveals that the public may perceive certain brain data as less sensitive than other 'private' information, like social security numbers, but more sensitive than some 'public' information, like media preferences. The findings also reveal that not all inferences about mental experiences may be perceived as equally sensitive, and perhaps not all data should be treated alike in ethical and policy discussions. An enhanced understanding of public perceptions of brain data could advance the development of ethical and legal norms concerning consumer neurotechnology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise of neurotechnologies, especially in combination with artificial intelligence (AI)-based methods for brain data analytics, has given rise to concerns around the protection of mental privacy, mental integrity and cognitive liberty – often framed as "neurorights" in ethical, legal, and policy discussions. Several states are now looking at including neurorights into their constitutional legal frameworks, and international institutions and organizations, such as UNESCO and the Council of Europe, are taking an active interest in developing international policy and governance guidelines on this issue. However, in many discussions of neurorights the philosophical assumptions, ethical frames of reference and legal interpretation are either not made explicit or conflict with each other. The aim of this multidisciplinary work is to provide conceptual, ethical, and legal foundations that allow for facilitating a common minimalist conceptual understanding of mental privacy, mental integrity, and cognitive liberty to facilitate scholarly, legal, and policy discussions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite extensive research, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) remains a progressive and invariably fatal neurodegenerative disease. Limited knowledge of the underlying causes of ALS has made it difficult to target upstream biological mechanisms of disease, and therapeutic interventions are usually administered relatively late in the course of disease. Genetic forms of ALS offer a unique opportunity for therapeutic development, as genetic associations may reveal potential insights into disease etiology. Genetic ALS may also be amenable to investigating earlier intervention given the possibility of identifying clinically presymptomatic, at-risk individuals with causative genetic variants. There is increasing evidence for a presymptomatic phase of ALS, with biomarker data from the Pre-Symptomatic Familial ALS (Pre-fALS) study showing that an elevation in blood neurofilament light chain (NfL) precedes phenoconversion to clinically manifest disease. Tofersen is an investigational antisense oligonucleotide designed to reduce synthesis of superoxide dismutase 1 (SOD1) protein through degradation of SOD1 mRNA. Informed by Pre-fALS and the tofersen clinical development program, the ATLAS study (NCT04856982) is designed to evaluate the impact of initiating tofersen in presymptomatic carriers of SOD1 variants associated with high or complete penetrance and rapid disease progression who also have biomarker evidence of disease activity (elevated plasma NfL). The ATLAS study will investigate whether tofersen can delay the emergence of clinically manifest ALS. To our knowledge, ATLAS is the first interventional trial in presymptomatic ALS and has the potential to yield important insights into the design and conduct of presymptomatic trials, identification, and monitoring of at-risk individuals, and future treatment paradigms in ALS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The NIH-funded Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies® (BRAIN) Initiative has led to significant advances in what we know about the functions and capacities of the brain. This multifaceted and expansive effort supports a range of experimentation from cells to circuits, and its outputs promise to ease suffering from various neurological injuries, diseases, and neuropsychiatric conditions. At the midway point of the 10-year BRAIN Initiative, we pause to consider how these studies, and neuroscience research more broadly, may bear on human characteristics and moral concepts such as identity, agency, and others. This midway point also offers us an opportunity to evaluate the sociology and impacts of BRAIN Initiative-funded investigations to ensure that ethical standards of fairness and justice pervade the scientific process itself. Neuroethics inquiry provides a mechanism to invite relevant, novel expertise from the wide array of disciplines that intersect with biomedicine in neuroscience research. As the BRAIN Initiative and the broader field of neuroscience proceed, neuroethics serves as a central component of neuroscience inquiry to i) foster necessary and beneficial collaborations for responsible discovery; ii) ensure a rigorous, reproducible, and representative neuroscience research process; and iii) explore the unique nature of study of the human brain through accurate and representative models of its function and dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers need guidance on animal use and the many issues opened up by a new study on whole-brain restoration, argue Nita A. Farahany, Henry T. Greely and Charles M. Giattino. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented which discusses the role of the ethical guidelines for genetic testing in immigration in the U.S. Topics discussed include announcement of the U.S. policy to use DNA testing as evidence of immigrant family relationships in refugee programs; importance of reunification in guidelines governing DNA testing; and international guidelines which ensure that respect for individuals, data privacy, and integrity of the family reunification process.

Difficult questions will be raised as models of the human brain get closer to replicating its functions, explain Nita A. Farahany, Henry T. Greely and 15 colleagues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rapid advances in science and technology are opening doors for the fulfillment of human desires in ways that were not previously possible. Neural, genetic, pharmacological, and physical forms of augmentation of the human experience promise to multiply both in number and complexity over the next decades. It is our responsibility to create a public, open discourse around the ethical implications of technology that will shape what it means to be human in the near and distant future. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article focuses on the principles implemented by the Neuroethics Working Group of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative towards understanding neuroscience. It talks about the ethics and the guidelines set for the development of neuroscience by the Food and Drug Administration.

The goal of this study was to examine the growing use of neurological and behavioral genetic evidence by criminal defendants in US criminal law. Judicial opinions issued between 2005-12 that discussed the use of neuroscience or behavioral genetics by criminal defendants were identified, coded and analysed. Criminal defendants are increasingly introducing such evidence to challenge defendants' competency, the effectiveness of defense counsel at trial, and to mitigate punishment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Current models of protecting human subjects create a zero-sum game of privacy versus data utility. We propose shifting the paradigm to techniques that facilitate trust between researchers and participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Some have argued that physicians should not presume to make thrombolysis decisions for incapacitated patients with acute ischemic stroke because the risks and benefits of thrombolysis involve deeply personal values. We evaluated the influence of the inability to consent and of personal health-related values on older adults' emergency treatment preferences for both ischemic stroke and cardiac arrest. Methods A total of 2,154 US adults age ≥50 years read vignettes in which they had either suffered an acute ischemic stroke and could be treated with thrombolysis, or had suffered a sudden cardiac arrest and could be treated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Participants were then asked (1) whether they would want the intervention, or (2) whether they would want to be given the intervention even if their informed consent could not be obtained. We elicited health-related values as predictors of these judgments. Results Older adults were as likely to want stroke thrombolysis when unable to consent (78.1%) as when asked directly (76.2%), whereas older adults were more likely to want cardiopulmonary resuscitation when unable to consent (83.6% compared to 75.9%). Greater confidence in the medical system and reliance on statistical information in decision making were both associated with desiring thrombolysis. Interpretation Older adults regard thrombolysis no less favorably when considering a situation in which they are unable to consent. These findings provide empirical support for recent professional society recommendations to treat ischemic stroke with thrombolysis in appropriate emergency circumstances under a presumption of consent. Ann Neurol 2014;76:296-304 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research—in which subjects were studied longitudinally from childhood until adulthood—has started to clarify how a child’s environment and genetic makeup interact to create a violent adolescent or adult. For example, male subjects who were born with a particular allele of the monoamine oxidase A gene and also were maltreated as children had a much greater likelihood of manifesting violent antisocial behavior as adolescents and adults. Also, individuals who were born with particular alleles of the serotonin transporter gene and also experienced multiple stressful life events were more likely to manifest serious depression and suicidality. This research raises the question of whether testimony regarding a defendant’s genotype, exposure to child maltreatment, and experience of unusual stress is appropriate to present during the guilt or penalty phases of criminal trials, especially when capital punishment is a consideration. The authors present their experience in genotyping criminal defendants and presenting genetic information at criminal trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the results of a study which examined the application of presumption of consent to emergent treatment of acute ischemic stroke with intravenous thrombolysis. Topics discussed include valid grounds for presuming individual consent to thrombolysis for stroke in a case involving unknown treatment preferences of an incapacitated older patient and the acceptance of the presumption of consent for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

The article discusses various papers published in this issue including one by Largent by Largent on the 2014 Ebola outbreak, one by Berryessa et al. on biological treatments for criminals, and one by Yu on biobanks.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including the regulatory framework for brain stimulation, the use of consumer transcranial current devices and the use of neuroscience evidence in Canada, the Netherlands and Great Britain.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including neurobiological evidences in criminal lawsuits, genetic testing for promoting health, and the use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) devices in the U.S.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including relation between neuroscience and criminal responsibility, genetic explanations for misbehaviour, and articles from students of Harvard Law School, Massachusetts.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including bioethics, research ethics and biosciences.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including research ethics, surrogacy litigation abroad, and genetic data sharing policies.