Neuroethical implications of focused ultrasound for neuropsychiatric illness

Asher, Rachel; Hyun, Insoo; Head, Mitchell A.; Cosgrove, G. Rees; Silbersweig, David

doi:10.1016/j.brs.2023.04.020

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While there are some surveys on patient opinions 8 , they do not cover novel approaches such as noninvasive focused ultrasound neuromodulation. At the same time, ethical questions are relevant for both ultrasound 9 and other neuromodulation techniques 10-12 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A large-scale online survey of patients and the general public: Preferring safe and noninvasive neuromodulation for mental health

Atkinson-Clement,

Junor,

Kaiser

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While neurotechnology provides opportunities for novel mental health interventions, preferences of patients and the general public, and the reasons for their choices are still unclear. Here, we conducted a large-scale online survey with 785 participants, half of them suffering from psychiatric and/or neurological conditions. We asked about techniques ranging from invasive (pharmaceutical drugs and brain implants) to noninvasive approaches (ultrasound, magnetic, or electric stimulation). First, participants had a low level of prior knowledge but were interested and excited about these opportunities. Second, both patients and the general population preferred focused ultrasound stimulation (first choice) while drugs and implants were ranked 3rd and 5th out of five, respectively. Finally, that preference was mainly driven by whether they perceived a technology as safe, rather than as effective. Overall, this survey identifies safety as main criterion for interventions and shows a preference for novel noninvasive approaches such as focused ultrasound neuromodulation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A large-scale online survey of patients and the general public: Preferring safe and noninvasive neuromodulation for mental health

Atkinson-Clement,

Junor,

Kaiser

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

(Re-)Redefining Neuroethics to Meet the Challenges of the Future

Cohen

2023

AJOB Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public Perceptions of Neurotechnologies Used to Target Mood, Memory, and Motor Symptoms

Furrer,

Merner,

Stevens

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAdvances in the development of neurotechnologies have the potential to revolutionize treatment of brain-based conditions. However, a critical concern revolves around the willingness of the public to embrace these technologies, especially considering the tumultuous histories of certain neurosurgical interventions. Therefore, examining public attitudes is paramount to uncovering potential barriers to adoption ensuring ethically sound innovation.MethodsIn the present study, we investigate public attitudes towards the use of four neurotechnologies (within-subjects conditions): deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), pills, and MRI-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) as potential treatments to a person experiencing either mood, memory, or motor symptoms (between-subjects conditions). US-based participants (N=1052; stratified to be nationally representative based on sex, race, age) were asked about their perceptions of risk, benefit, invasiveness, acceptability, perceived change to the person, and personal interest in using these neurotechnologies for symptom alleviation.ResultsDescriptive results indicate variability between technologies that the U.S. public is willing to consider if experiencing severe mood, memory, or motor symptoms. The main effect of neurotechnology revealed DBS was viewed as the most invasive and risky treatment and was perceived to lead to the greatest change to who someone is as a person. DBS was also viewed as least likely to be personally used and least acceptable for use by others. When examining the main effects of symptomatology, we found that all forms of neuromodulation were perceived as significantly more beneficial, acceptable, and likely to be used by participants for motor symptoms, followed by memory symptoms, and lastly mood symptoms. Neuromodulation (averaging across neurotechnologies) was perceived as significantly riskier, more invasive, and leading to a greater change to person for mood versus motor symptoms; however, memory and motor symptoms were perceived similarly with respect to risk, invasiveness, and change to person.ConclusionThese results suggest that the public views neuromodulatory approaches that require surgery (i.e., DBS and MRgFUS) as riskier, more invasive, and less acceptable than those that do not. Further, findings suggest individuals may be more reluctant to alter or treat psychological symptoms with neuromodulation compared to physical symptoms.

show abstract

Neuroethical implications of focused ultrasound for neuropsychiatric illness

Cited by 4 publications

References 88 publications

A large-scale online survey of patients and the general public: Preferring safe and noninvasive neuromodulation for mental health

A large-scale online survey of patients and the general public: Preferring safe and noninvasive neuromodulation for mental health

(Re-)Redefining Neuroethics to Meet the Challenges of the Future

Public Perceptions of Neurotechnologies Used to Target Mood, Memory, and Motor Symptoms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About