Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32716747›Full record

ArticleAJOB neuroscience

NeuroEthics and the BRAIN Initiative: Where Are We? Where Are We Going?

Walter J Koroshetz, Jackie Ward, Christine Grady

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in AJOB neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Walter J KoroshetzNational Institute of Neurolgogical Disorders and Stroke.
Jackie WardNational Institute of Neurolgogical Disorders and Stroke.
Christine GradyNational Institutes of Health.
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke · USNational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From its inception, the NIH Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative, an ambitious project focused on understanding the human brain, has made a concerted effort to integrate neuroethics into its science. In the past five years, the BRAIN Initiative has given rise to powerful tools and neurotechnologies capable of probing deeply into the brain circuits in animal models. As these tools mature and move to human applications they will raise a host of important neuroethical considerations not just for the medical community but for society as a whole. Now marks a pivotal moment to assess the status and consider the future of the BRAIN Initiative's neuroethics efforts. Here we describe core issues of neuroscience advances, the state of neurotechnologies in human neuroscience, and how ethics will be incorporated into the BRAIN Initiative as this ten-year project enters its second phase. BRAIN Initiative neurotechnologies have immense potential to transform the way we diagnose and treat neurological disease; therefore, they may become more commonplace in research, medicine, and society. We also discuss future global efforts to ensure continued guidance and open dialogue surrounding neuroethics.

Indexed as

NeurosciencesAnimalsBrainBrain MappingCentral Nervous SystemHumansModels, Animalbrainbrain computer interfacesbrain fingerprintingConsciousnessdeep brain stimulationneural networks

Identifiers

PMID32716747
OpenAlexW3044060642

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.