No abstract

A man with a spinal-cord injury (right) prepares for a virtual cycle race in which competitors steer avatars using brain signals. COMMENT © 2 0 1 7 M a c m i l l a n P u b l i s h e r s L i m i t e d , p a r t o f S p r i n g e r N a t u r e . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .example. Moreover, researchers can already interpret a person's neural activity from functional magnetic resonance imaging scans at a rudimentary level 1 -that the individual is thinking of a person, say, rather than a car.It might take years or even decades until BCI and other neurotechnologies are part of our daily lives. But technological developments mean that we are on a path to a world in which it will be possible to decode people's mental processes and directly manipulate the brain mechanisms underlying their intentions, emotions and decisions; where individuals could communicate with others simply by thinking; and where powerful computational systems linked directly to people's brains aid their interactions with the world such that their mental and physical abilities are greatly enhanced.Such advances could revolutionize the treatment of many conditions, from brain injury and paralysis to epilepsy and schizophrenia, and transform human experience for the better. But the technology could also exacerbate social inequalities and offer corporations, hackers, governments or anyone else new ways to exploit and manipulate people. And it could profoundly alter some core human characteristics: private mental life, individual agency and an understanding of individuals as entities bound by their bodies.It is crucial to consider the possible ramifications now.The Morningside Group comprises neuroscientists, neurotechnologists, clinicians, ethicists and machine-intelligence engineers. It includes representatives from Google and Kernel (a neurotechnology start-up in Los Angeles, California); from international brain projects; and from academic and research institutions in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, China, Japan and Australia. We gathered at a workshop sponsored by the US National Science Foundation at Columbia University, New York, in May 2017 to discuss the ethics of neurotechnologies and machine intelligence.We believe that existing ethics guidelines are insufficient for this realm 2 . These include the Declaration of Helsinki, a statement of ethical principles first established in 1964 for medical research involving human subjects (go.nature.com/2z262ag); the Belmont Report, a 1979 statement crafted by the US National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research (go.nature.com/2hrezmb); and the Asilomar artificial intelligence (AI) statement of cautionary principles, published early this year and signed by business leaders and AI researchers, among others (go.nature.com/2ihnqac).To begin to address this deficit, here we lay out recommendations relating to four areas of concern: privacy and consent; agency and identity; augmentation; and bias. Different nations and people of varying re...

Premature birth is a major public health problem in the United States and internationally. Infants born at or before 32 weeks' gestation (2% of all births in the United States in 2007) are at extremely high risk for death in the neonatal period or for pulmonary, visual, and neurodevelopmental morbidities with lifelong consequences including bronchopulmonary dysplasia, retinopathy of prematurity, and brain injury. Risks for adverse outcomes increase with decreasing gestational age. The economic costs to care for these infants are also substantial (estimated at $26 billion in 2005 in the United States). It is clear that the need for strategies to improve outcomes for this high-risk population is great, and this need has prompted testing of new therapies with the potential to decrease pulmonary and other complications of prematurity. Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) emerged as one such therapy. To provide health care professionals, families, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data regarding the benefits and risks of iNO in premature infants, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and the Office of Medical Applications of Research of the National Institutes of Health convened a consensus-development conference. Findings from a substantial body of experimental work in developing animals and other model systems suggest that nitric oxide may enhance lung growth and reduce lung inflammation independently of its effects on blood vessel resistance. Although this work demonstrates biological plausibility and the results of randomized controlled trials in term and near-term infants were positive, combined evidence from the 14 randomized controlled trials of iNO treatment in premature infants of ≤ 34 weeks' gestation shows equivocal effects on pulmonary outcomes, survival, and neurodevelopmental outcomes.

Context Spiritual care (SC) from medical practitioners is infrequent at the end of life (EOL) despite national standards. Objectives The study aimed to describe nurses' and physicians' desire to provide SC to terminally ill patients and assess 11 potential SC barriers. Methods This was a survey-based, multisite study conducted from October 2008 through January 2009. All eligible oncology nurses and physicians at four Boston academic centers were approached for study participation; 339 nurses and physicians participated (response rate = 63%). Results Most nurses and physicians desire to provide SC within the setting of terminal illness (74% vs. 60%, respectively; P = 0.002); however, 40% of nurses/physicians provide SC less often than they desire. The most highly endorsed barriers were “lack of private space” for nurses and “lack of time” for physicians, but neither was associated with actual SC provision. Barriers that predicted less frequent SC for all medical professionals included inadequate training (nurses: odds ratio [OR] = 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.12–0.73, P = 0.01; physicians: OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.25–0.95, P = 0.04), “not my professional role” (nurses: OR = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.07–0.61, P = 0.004; physicians: OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.17–0.72, P = 0.004), and “power inequity with patient” (nurses: OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.12–0.87, P = 0.03; physicians: OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.21–0.78, P = 0.007). A minority of nurses and physicians (21% and 49%, P = 0.003, respectively) did not desire SC training. Those less likely to desire SC training reported lower self-ratings of spirituality (nurses: OR = 5.00, 95% CI = 1.82–12.50, P = 0.002; physicians: OR = 3.33, 95% CI = 1.82–5.88, P < 0.001) and male gender (physicians: OR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.67–5.56, P < 0.001). Conclusion SC training is suggested to be critical to the provision of SC in accordance with national care quality standards.

Clinicians frequently escalate the dose of sedatives or analgesics to dying patients as life-sustaining treatment is withdrawn, citing patient-centered reasons as their principle justification. Hastening death is seen as an unintended consequence of appropriate care. A large majority of physicians and nurses agreed with patient management and were satisfied with the care provided. Care of the dying patient after the forgoing of life-sustaining treatment remains underanalyzed and needs more rigorous examination by the critical care community.

Nearly two-thirds of pediatric critical care physicians and nurses express views on end-of-life care in strong agreement with consensus positions on these issues adopted by national professional organizations. Clinicians with fewer years of pediatric critical care practice are less likely to agree with this consensus. Compared with physicians, nurses are significantly less likely to agree that families are well informed and ethical issues are well discussed when assessing actual practice in their intensive care unit. More collaborative education and regular case review on bioethical issues are needed as part of standard practice in the intensive care unit.

the CDaCI Investigative Team abstract BACKGROUND: Most children with hearing loss who receive cochlear implants (CI) learn spoken language, and parents must choose early on whether to use sign language to accompany speech at home. We address whether parents' use of sign language before and after CI positively influences auditory-only speech recognition, speech intelligibility, spoken language, and reading outcomes.

No abstract