ReviewBrain communications2019
Transcending the brain: is there a cost to hacking the nervous system?
Review in Brain communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invasive Brain-Computer Interface for Communication: A Scoping Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Community perspectives regarding brain-computer interfaces: A cross-sectional study of community-dwelling adults in the UK.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Electrical and Magnetic Neuromodulation Technologies and Brain-Computer Interfaces: Ethical Considerations for Enhancement of Brain Function in Healthy People - A Systematic Scoping Review.Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Great advancements have recently been made to understand the brain and the potential that we can extract out of it. Much of this has been centred on modifying electrical activity of the nervous system for improved physical and cognitive performance in those with clinical impairment. However, there is a risk of going beyond purely physiological performance improvements and striving for human enhancement beyond traditional human limits. Simple ethical guidelines and legal doctrine must be examined to keep ahead of technological advancement in light of the impending mergence between biology and machine. By understanding the role of modern ethics, this review aims to appreciate the fine boundary between what is considered ethically justified for current neurotechnology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.