ArticleAJOB neuroscience
Exit from Brain Device Research: A Modified Grounded Theory Study of Researcher Obligations and Participant Experiences.
Article in AJOB neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implantable Neuromodulation Devices in Psychiatry: Human Fidelity and Implementation Challenges.The American journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Article
- Recommendations on post-trial responsibility in implantable neural device research: a multidisciplinary consensus study.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Ethical Guidance for Investigational Implantable Neural Device Studies: Recommendations for Researchers and Research Ethics Committees.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2026Review
- Deep brain stimulation clinical trials: a framework to accelerate recruitment, retention, and technology translation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Qualitative studies involving users of clinical neurotechnology: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Developer perspectives on the ethics of AI-driven neural implants: a qualitative study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Post-trial access to implantable neural devices: an exploratory international survey.BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2024Article
- Brain Pioneers and Moral Entanglement: An Argument for Post-trial Responsibilities in Neural-Device Trials.The Hastings Center report · 2024Article
- The Role of Family Members in Psychiatric Deep Brain Stimulation Trials: More Than Psychosocial Support.Neuroethics · 2023Article
- Asking questions that matter - Question prompt lists as tools for improving the consent process for neurotechnology clinical trials.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Post-trial access in implanted neural device research: Device maintenance, abandonment, and cost.Brain stimulationArticle
- Beyond "Ensuring Understanding": Toward a Patient-Partnered Neuroethics of Brain Device Research.AJOB neuroscienceArticle
- Brain Device Research and the Underappreciated Role of Care Partners before, during, and Post-Trial.AJOB neuroscienceArticle
- Participant Engagement, Epistemic Injustice, and Early-Phase Implanted Neural Device Research.The Hastings Center reportArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As clinical trials end, little is understood about how participants exiting from clinical trials approach decisions related to the removal or post-trial use of investigational brain implants, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) devices. This empirical bioethics study examines how research participants experience the process of exit from research at the end of clinical trials of implanted neural devices. Using a modified grounded theory study design, we conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 16 former research participants from clinical trials of DBS and responsive neurostimulation (RNS). Open-ended questions elicited motivations for joining the trial, understanding of study procedures at the time of initial informed consent, the process of exiting from research, and decisions about device removal or post-trial device use. Thematic analysis identified categories related to: limited preparedness for the end of research participation, straightforwardness of decisions to explant or keep the device, reconciling with the end of research participation, reconciling post-trial expectations, and achieving a sense of closure after exit from research. A preliminary theoretical model describes contextual factors influencing the process and experience of exit from research. Experiences of clinical trial participants should guide research practices to enhance the ethical design and conduct of clinical trials in DBS and other brain devices.
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.