A Global Vision for Neuroethics Needs More Social Justice: Brain Imaging, Chronic Pain, and Population Health Inequalities.

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.

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.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Neurotechnology Governance in the United States: Gaps and Opportunities.Bioethics · 2026
   Review
2. Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2025
   Article
3. Neuroethical issues in adopting brain imaging for personalized chronic pain management: Attitudes of people with lived experience of chronic pain.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2024
   Article
4. Translational Neuroethics: A Vision for a More Integrated, Inclusive, and Impactful Field.AJOB neuroscience
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Neuroethics at 15: The Current and Future Environment for Neuroethics.

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as