Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28653164›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2018

Should DBS for Psychiatric Disorders be Considered a Form of Psychosurgery? Ethical and Legal Considerations.

Devan Stahl, Laura Cabrera, Tyler Gibb

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Deep brain stimulation and revising the Mental Health Act: the case for intervention-specific safeguards.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2019
    Article
  6. Neuroethics of Neuromodulation: An Update.Current opinion in biomedical engineering · 2018
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Medical Students' Knowledge and Perception of Deep Brain Stimulation.Journal of medical education and curricular development
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Devan StahlMichigan State Univeristy, College of Human Medicine, East Fee Hall, 965 Fee Rd, RmC213, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA. stahldev@msu.edu.
Laura CabreraMichigan State University, College of Human Medicine, East Fee Hall, 965 Fee Rd, RmC211, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.
Tyler GibbWestern Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, 1000 Oakland Drive, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008, USA.
Michigan State University · USWestern Michigan University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep brain stimulation (DBS), a surgical procedure involving the implantation of electrodes in the brain, has rekindled the medical community's interest in psychosurgery. Whereas many researchers argue DBS is substantially different from psychosurgery, we argue psychiatric DBS-though a much more precise and refined treatment than its predecessors-is nevertheless a form of psychosurgery, which raises both old and new ethical and legal concerns that have not been given proper attention. Learning from the ethical and regulatory failures of older forms of psychosurgery can help shed light on how to address the regulatory gaps that exist currently in DBS research. To show why it is important to address the current regulatory gaps within psychiatric DBS, we draw on the motivations underlying the regulation of earlier forms of psychosurgery in the US. We begin by providing a brief history of psychosurgery and electrical brain stimulation in the US. Against this backdrop, we introduce psychiatric DBS, exploring current research and ongoing clinical trials. We then draw out the ethical and regulatory similarities between earlier forms of psychosurgery and psychiatric DBS. As we will show, the factors that motivated strict regulation of earlier psychosurgical procedures mirror concerns with psychiatric DBS today. We offer three recommendations for psychiatric DBS regulation, which echo earlier motivations for regulating psychosurgery, along with new considerations that reflect the novel technologies used in DBS.

Indexed as

Deep Brain StimulationEthics, MedicalPsychosurgerySocial Control, FormalBrainElectrodesHumansMental DisordersPsychiatryDeep brain stimulationLegal regulationsNeuroethicsPsychiatric disordersPsychosurgery

Identifiers

PMID28653164
OpenAlexW2659444354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.