Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. What Happens After a Neural Implant Study? Neuroethics Expert Workshop on Post-Trial Obligations.Ishan Dasgupta, Eran Klein, Laura Y. Cabrera, Winston Chiong, Ashley Feinsinger, Joseph J. Fins, Tobias Haeusermann, Saskia Hendriks, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, Cynthia Kubu, Helen Mayberg, Khara Ramos, Adina Roskies, Lauren Sankary, Ashley Walton, Alik S. Widge & Sara Goering - 2024 - Neuroethics 17 (2):1-14.
    What happens at the end of a clinical trial for an investigational neural implant? It may be surprising to learn how difficult it is to answer this question. While new trials are initiated with increasing regularity, relatively little consensus exists on how best to conduct them, and even less on how to ethically end them. The landscape of recent neural implant trials demonstrates wide variability of what happens to research participants after an neural implant trial ends. Some former research participants (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Disentangling Function from Benefit: Participant Perspectives from an Early Feasibility Trial for a Novel Visual Cortical Prosthesis.Lilyana Levy, Hamasa Ebadi, Ally Peabody Smith, Lauren Taiclet, Nader Pouratian & Ashley Feinsinger - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (3):158-176.
    Visual cortical prostheses (VCPs) have the potential to provide artificial vision for visually impaired persons. However, the nature and utility of this form of vision is not yet fully understood. Participants in the early feasibility trial for the Orion VCP were interviewed to gain insight into their experiences using artificial vision, their motivations for participation, as well as their expectations and assessments of risks and benefits. Analyzed using principles of grounded theory and an interpretive description approach, these interviews yielded six (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Opportunity Cost or Opportunity Lost: An Empirical Assessment of Ethical Concerns and Attitudes of EEG Neurofeedback Users.Louiza Kalokairinou, Rebekah Choi, Ashwini Nagappan & Anna Wexler - 2022 - Neuroethics 15 (3):1-13.
    Electroencephalography (EEG) neurofeedback is a type of biofeedback that purportedly teaches users how to control their brainwaves. Although neurofeedback is currently offered by thousands of providers worldwide, its provision is contested, as its effectiveness beyond a placebo effect is unproven. While scholars have voiced numerous ethical concerns about neurofeedback—regarding opportunity cost, physical and psychological harms, financial cost, and informed consent—to date these concerns have remained theoretical. This pilot study aimed to provide insights on whether these issues were supported by empirical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Engagement, Exploitation, and Human Intracranial Electrophysiology Research.Michelle T. Pham, Nader Pouratian & Ashley Feinsinger - 2022 - Neuroethics 15 (3):1-15.
    Motivated by exploitation concerns, we argue for the importance of participant engagement in basic human intracranial electrophysiology research. This research takes advantage of unique neurosurgical opportunities to better understand complex systems of the human brain, but it also exposes participants to additional risks without immediate therapeutic intent. We argue that understanding participant values and incorporating their perspectives into the research process may help determine whether and to what extent research practices and the resulting distributions of risks and benefits constitute exploitation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • “They were already inside my head to begin with”: Trust, Translational Misconception, and Intraoperative Brain Research.Ally Peabody Smith, Lauren Taiclet, Hamasa Ebadi, Lilyana Levy, Megan Weber, Eugene M. Caruso, Nader Pouratian & Ashley Feinsinger - 2023 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 14 (2):111-124.
    Background: Patients undergoing invasive neurosurgical procedures offer researchers unique opportunities to study the brain. Deep brain stimulation patients, for example, may participate in research during the surgical implantation of the stimulator device. Although this research raises many ethical concerns, little attention has been paid to basic studies, which offer no therapeutic benefits, and the value of patient-participant perspectives.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fourteen individuals across two studies who participated in basic intraoperative research during their deep brain stimulator surgery. Interviews (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Asking questions that matter – Question prompt lists as tools for improving the consent process for neurotechnology clinical trials.Andreas Schönau, Sara Goering, Erika Versalovic, Natalia Montes, Tim Brown, Ishan Dasgupta & Eran Klein - 2022 - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 16.
    Implantable neurotechnology devices such as Brain Computer Interfaces and Deep Brain Stimulators are an increasing part of treating or exploring potential treatments for neurological and psychiatric disorders. While only a few devices are approved, many promising prospects for future devices are under investigation. The decision to participate in a clinical trial can be challenging, given a variety of risks to be taken into consideration. During the consent process, prospective participants might lack the language to consider those risks, feel unprepared, or (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations