Abstract
Highly portable, cloud-enabled neuroimaging technologies will fundamentally change neuroimaging research. Instead of participants traveling to the scanner, the scanner will now come to them. Field-based brain imaging research, including populations underrepresented in neuroscience research to date, will enlarge and diversify databases and pave the way for clinical and direct-to-consumer (DTC) applications. Yet these technological developments urgently require analysis of their ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI). No consensus ethical frameworks for mobile neuroimaging exist, and existing policies for traditional MRI research are inadequate. Based on literature review and ethics analysis of neurotechnology development efforts, Shen et al. identify seven foundational, yet unresolved, ELSI issues posed by portable neuroimaging: (1) informed consent; (2) privacy; (3) capacity to accurately communicate neuroimaging results to remote participants; (4) extensive reliance on cloud-based artificial intelligence (AI) for data analysis; (5) potential bias of interpretive algorithms in diverse populations; (6) return of research results and incidental (or secondary) findings to research participants; and (7) responding to participant requests for access to their data. The article proposes a path forward to address these urgent issues.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 771-775 |
Number of pages | 5 |
Journal | Neuron |
Volume | 105 |
Issue number | 5 |
DOIs |
|
State | Published - Mar 4 2020 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:This work was supported by a National Institutes of Health Neuroethics Administrative Supplement ( 3U01EB025153-02S2 ). For research assistance, we thank Travis Panneck, Sydney Diekmann, Warren Cormack, Julie Griep, Andrew Park, and Jacob Hauschild. For grants management support, we thank Audrey Boyle, Deb Morgan, and Carolyn Wielde. All views are those of the authors and not the funders.
Funding Information:
This work was supported by a National Institutes of Health Neuroethics Administrative Supplement (3U01EB025153-02S2). For research assistance, we thank Travis Panneck, Sydney Diekmann, Warren Cormack, Julie Griep, Andrew Park, and Jacob Hauschild. For grants management support, we thank Audrey Boyle, Deb Morgan, and Carolyn Wielde. All views are those of the authors and not the funders.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020
Keywords
- EEG
- MEG
- MRI
- PET
- artificial intelligence
- bias
- bioethics
- diverse populations
- fMRI
- fNIRS
- informed consent
- neuroethics
- neuroimaging
- privacy
- research ethics
- return of results