ArticleNeuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society2026
Ethical Considerations in Transcranial Focused Ultrasound Neuromodulation for Disorders of Consciousness.
Article in Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTranscranial focused ultrasound stimulation (tFUS), also known as low-intensity focused ultrasound pulsation, may noninvasively modulate key brain networks subserving consciousness and carries promise as a novel interventional tool to stimulate recovery of consciousness in individuals with disorders of consciousness (DoC) after severe brain injury. However, the novelty of this approach and its attendant effects raise underexplored ethical considerations warranting explicit attention to ensure responsible development and deployment in clinical research and practice. Our objectives here are to develop an ethical framework for responsible translation of this emerging neurotechnology. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo identify and critically evaluate the responsible use of tFUS to promote recovery of consciousness in individuals with DoC, we evaluate ethical considerations through the lens of the principles of biomedical ethics, coupled with thematic, normative, and philosophical analysis. We describe safeguards for innovation and clinical translation in this domain.
resultsSpecific ethical domains evaluated include respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice, enrollment considerations, and fair study access, which synergistically inform an ethical framework for stakeholders involved in pioneering and early use of tFUS.
conclusionsTo provide support for clinicians and investigators navigating complex decision-making at the nexus of neurotechnology and neuroethics, we propose a practical checklist for ethical implementation and evaluation of tFUS studies for patients with DoC.
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.