Brain implants are being trialled for their potential to ameliorate treatment-resistant conditions or to restore function. However, there are no clear guidelines for continued access to brain implants for trial participants whose symptoms improve with these devices.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Developer perspectives on the ethics of AI-driven neural implants: a qualitative study
Scientific Reports Open Access 03 April 2024
-
The Role of Family Members in Psychiatric Deep Brain Stimulation Trials: More Than Psychosocial Support
Neuroethics Open Access 26 May 2023
-
Towards clinical application of implantable brain–computer interfaces for people with late-stage ALS: medical and ethical considerations
Journal of Neurology Open Access 30 November 2022
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$189.00 per year
only $15.75 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Holtzheimer, P. E. et al. Lancet Psychiatry 4, 839–849 (2017).
Underwood, E. Science https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar3698 (2017).
Rossi, P. J., Giordano, J. & Okun, M. S. JAMA Neurol. 74, 9–10 (2017).
World Medical Association. JAMA 310, 2191–2194 (2013).
Richardson, H. S. & Belsky, L. Hastings Cent. Rep. 34, 25–33 (2004).
Acknowledgements
The authors thank M. Husain and A. Viswanathan for helpful input about issues addressed in this article. Research for this article was funded by the US National Institute of Mental Health (grant R01-MH114854-01 to G.L.M.), the US National Eye Institute (grant R01-EY023336-04 to D.Y.) and the US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (grant UH3-NS100549-01 to W.K.G.).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Disclaimer
The views expressed are those of the authors alone, and do not necessarily reflect views of the NIH or Baylor College of Medicine.
Related Links
CIOMS/WHO guidelines: https://cioms.ch/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/WEB-CIOMS-EthicalGuidelines.pdf
NBAC report: https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/nbac/clinical/Vol1.pdf
Belmont Report: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/
The Dish: Participants as Partners: https://allofus.nih.gov/news-events-and-media/videos/dish-participants-partners
Participation: https://allofus.nih.gov/about/participation
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lázaro-Muñoz, G., Yoshor, D., Beauchamp, M.S. et al. Continued access to investigational brain implants. Nat Rev Neurosci 19, 317–318 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-018-0004-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-018-0004-5
This article is cited by
-
Developer perspectives on the ethics of AI-driven neural implants: a qualitative study
Scientific Reports (2024)
-
The Role of Family Members in Psychiatric Deep Brain Stimulation Trials: More Than Psychosocial Support
Neuroethics (2023)
-
Towards clinical application of implantable brain–computer interfaces for people with late-stage ALS: medical and ethical considerations
Journal of Neurology (2023)
-
Restoring vision using optogenetics without being blind to the risks
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2022)
