Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42782464›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2026

Beyond Innovation: The Burdens and Harms of Maintenance in Deep Brain Stimulation.

Marilena Pateraki, Frederic Gilbert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 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

2 authors.

Marilena PaterakiDepartment of History and Philosophy of Science, National Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6589-4162
Frederic GilbertSchool of Humanities, Philosophy and Gender Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia. fredericgilbertt@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0524-8649

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this contribution, we explore iatrogenic harms associated with the maintenance of deep brain stimulation (DBS) systems. By conceptualizing patients with neural implants as infrastructures, we examine them as ongoing sites of maintenance that require continual care and adjustments. This analysis reveals the tradeoffs inherent in implantable neurotechnologies. Using first-hand accounts collected during a qualitative study of individuals with Parkinson's disease treated with DBS, we subsequently develop a typology of harms associated with maintenance, highlighting the ethical issues arising from the integration of technology in the body. Importantly, by focusing on older DBS devices within a healthcare system constrained by financial resources, we address a gap in the literature, as current debates tend to prioritize innovation while neglecting the difficulties of maintaining older implanted systems. Our findings show how inadequate or faulty maintenance compromises the successful incorporation and integration of technological components within the body, underscoring the ethical significance of maintenance in the context of DBS. Finally, we emphasize the inherent limitations of implanted technologies in managing chronic illness and the enduring importance of caregivers. This study calls for a more comprehensive examination of the ethical implications of the maintenance in relation to neural implants.

Indexed as

Deep Brain StimulationInventionsParkinson DiseaseCaregiversFemaleHumansIatrogenic DiseaseDeep brain stimulationEthicsHarmsIncorporationMaintenanceObsolescence

Identifiers

PMID42782464
PMCPMC13612705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.