Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32438287›Full record

ReviewiScience2020

Privacy Challenges to the Democratization of Brain Data.

Nicole Minielly, Viorica Hrincu, Judy Illes

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Opportunities and Limitations of Mobile Neuroimaging Technologies in Educational Neuroscience.Mind, brain and education : the official journal of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society · 2021
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Nicole MiniellyNeuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Koerner S124, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada.
Viorica HrincuNeuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Koerner S124, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada.
Judy IllesNeuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Koerner S124, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada. Electronic address: jilles@mail.ubc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wearable devices that record brain signals may present privacy concerns for consumers. Industry leaders discussed four such concerns with us that pertain to data collection and management, user autonomy and information transparency, exceptionalism of brain data, and regulatory systems.

Indexed as

BiodevicesBioengineeringBioethicsBiotechnologyTechniques in Neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID32438287
PMCPMC7235278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.