Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42080114›Full record

ReviewAvicenna journal of medical biotechnology2026

Challenges of the Application of Emerging Neuroscience Technologies in Courts.

Hassan Bakhtiary, Shahriar Eslamitabar, Shirin Shiarzian, Ehsan Lame

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology, 2026. 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

4 authors.

Hassan BakhtiaryDepartment of Neurosciences, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
Shahriar EslamitabarDepartment of Health Law, Smart University of Medical Sciences (SMUMS), Tehran, Iran.
Shirin ShiarzianDepartment of Law, Sciences and Researches Branches of Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Ehsan LameDepartment of International Law, Najafabad Branch of Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant advances in neuroscience have improved the ability of physicians to diagnose and manage neurological and psychiatric disorders in patients. The use of neuroscience evidence in criminal trials in developed countries has increased significantly in the last two decades. This rapid increase has raised questions among the legal and scientific communities about the effects that these technologies can have on judicial decision-makers. The role of neuroscience in criminal liability is a topic that has been discussed in recent years. The purpose of this article is to review the use of neuroscience evidence in the criminal justice system, as well as current research examining the effects of neuroscience evidence on judicial decision-makers in criminal cases. This review is warranted given legal and scientific concerns about the impact of potential bias. The present study was conducted and analyzed using a documentary method and with reference to research published in the last four years. Some argue that neuroscience is irrelevant in the criminal court, while others believe that it can help prove the lack of control of behavior by many criminals. However, the truth is likely somewhere in between, as certain types of neuroscience evidence may be useful and relevant in criminal trials. This article describes recent advances in neuroscience in the fields of functional neuroimaging and artificial intelligence "deep learning" algorithms, and examines the legal and ethical challenges and potential benefits and drawbacks.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceCriminal lawCriminalsDeep learningDeveloped countriesFunctional neuroimagingMental disorders

Identifiers

PMID42080114
PMCPMC13134667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.