Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40425633›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Exploring disparities in self-reported knowledge about neurotechnology.

Sebastian Sattler, Guido Mehlkop, Alexander Neuhaus, Anna Wexler, Peter B Reiner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Sebastian SattlerFaculty of Sociology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany. sebastian.sattler@uni-bielefeld.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-0754
Guido MehlkopFaculty of Economics, Law and Social Sciences, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3095-6188
Alexander NeuhausFaculty of Sociology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Anna WexlerDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6723-9038
Peter B ReinerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0587-5880

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With advances in neurotechnology and its use for medical treatment and beyond, it is important to understand the public's awareness of such technologies and potential disparities in self-reported knowledge, because knowledge is known to influence the acceptance and use of new technologies. This study utilizes a large sample (N = 10,339) to depict the existence and extent of self-reported knowledge of these neurotechnologies and to examine knowledge disparities between respondents. Results show that most respondents self-reported at least some knowledge of ultrasound and electroencephalography (EEG), but limited knowledge of BCIs. Prior use, being a healthcare professional, and health literacy increased the odds of self-reporting some knowledge. Also gender and age disparities exist. These findings may help identify uninformed groups in society and enhance information campaigns.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSelf ReportAdolescentAdultAgedElectroencephalographyFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40425633
PMCPMC12116940

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.