Caregivers in implantable brain-computer interface research: a scoping review.

Nicolai Wohns, Natalie Dorfman, Eran Klein
Author Information
  1. Nicolai Wohns: Department of Philosophy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
  2. Natalie Dorfman: Department of Philosophy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
  3. Eran Klein: Department of Philosophy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.

Abstract

Introduction: While the ethical significance of caregivers in neurological research has increasingly been recognized, the role of caregivers in brain-computer interface (BCI) research has received relatively less attention.
Objectives: This report investigates the extent to which caregivers are mentioned in publications describing implantable BCI (iBCI) research for individuals with motor dysfunction, communication impairment, and blindness.
Methods: The scoping review was conducted in June 2024 using the PubMed and Web of Science bibliographic databases. The articles were systematically searched using query terms for caregivers, family members, and guardians, and the results were quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed.
Results: Our search yielded 315 unique studies, 78 of which were included in this scoping review. Thirty-four (43.6%) of the 78 articles mentioned the study participant's caregivers. We sorted these into 5 categories: Twenty-two (64.7%) of the 34 articles thanked caregivers in the acknowledgement section, 6 (17.6%) articles described the caregiver's role with regard to the consent process, 12 (35.3%) described the caregiver's role in the technical maintenance and upkeep of the BCI system or in other procedural aspects of the study, 9 (26.5%) discussed how the BCI enhanced participant communication and goal-directed behavior with the help of a caregiver, and 3 (8.8%) articles included general comments that did not fit into the other categories but still related to the importance of caregivers in the lives of the research participants.
Discussion: Caregivers were mentioned in less than half of BCI studies in this review. The studies that offered more robust discussions of caregivers provide valuable insight into the integral role that caregivers play in supporting the study participants and the research process. Attention to the role of caregivers in successful BCI research studies can help guide the responsible development of future BCI study protocols.

Keywords

References

  1. Cureus. 2024 Apr 14;16(4):e58243 [PMID: 38745805]
  2. Neurosurg Focus. 2020 Jul;49(1):E2 [PMID: 32610290]
  3. Cureus. 2022 Jun 22;14(6):e26215 [PMID: 35891842]
  4. J Alzheimers Dis. 2018;62(2):621-633 [PMID: 29400666]
  5. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017 Dec 06;9(1):93 [PMID: 29212555]
  6. Dementia (London). 2019 Oct-Nov;18(7-8):2836-2855 [PMID: 29528701]
  7. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2022 Nov;36(10-11):666-677 [PMID: 36124975]
  8. PLoS One. 2023 Apr 6;18(4):e0284160 [PMID: 37023074]
  9. Neurodegener Dis Manag. 2021 Aug;11(4):277-288 [PMID: 34240627]
  10. N Engl J Med. 2021 Jul 15;385(3):217-227 [PMID: 34260835]
  11. Am J Bioeth. 2020 Jun;20(6):65-67 [PMID: 32441599]
  12. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2020 Dec;15(1):1748361 [PMID: 32268846]
  13. Neurology. 2023 Mar 14;100(11):e1177-e1192 [PMID: 36639237]
  14. Clin Ther. 2020 Aug;42(8):e150-e159 [PMID: 32741647]
  15. Physiol Rev. 2017 Apr;97(2):767-837 [PMID: 28275048]
  16. J Neural Eng. 2019 Feb;16(1):011001 [PMID: 30523919]
  17. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2021 Jul;68(7):2313-2325 [PMID: 33784612]
  18. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2019;29(2):159-185 [PMID: 31257230]
  19. Sci Data. 2022 Jul 22;9(1):434 [PMID: 35869138]
  20. Hastings Cent Rep. 2022 Nov;52(6):23-32 [PMID: 36537275]
  21. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2019 Nov;67(11):2267-2273 [PMID: 31355423]
  22. J Neural Eng. 2022 Aug 23;19(4): [PMID: 35931055]
  23. Neural Regen Res. 2018 Dec;13(12):2164-2172 [PMID: 30323149]
  24. Nature. 2023 Aug;620(7976):1031-1036 [PMID: 37612500]
  25. Int J Neural Syst. 2021 Jul;31(7):2150025 [PMID: 34130614]
  26. J Adv Nurs. 2013 Feb;69(2):338-47 [PMID: 22500886]
  27. J Neurointerv Surg. 2021 Feb;13(2):102-108 [PMID: 33115813]
  28. Neuroethics. 2023;16(2):14 [PMID: 37250273]
  29. J Neural Eng. 2011 Apr;8(2):025027 [PMID: 21436513]
  30. Nat Commun. 2022 Mar 22;13(1):1236 [PMID: 35318316]
  31. J Neurophysiol. 2018 Jul 1;120(1):343-360 [PMID: 29694279]
  32. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2022 Sep;164(9):2299-2302 [PMID: 35604492]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0caregiversBCIresearchrolearticlesreviewstudiesstudybrain-computerinterfacementionedscopinglessimplantablecommunicationusing78included6%describedcaregiver'sprocesshelpparticipantsCaregiversIntroduction:ethicalsignificanceneurologicalincreasinglyrecognizedreceivedrelativelyattentionObjectives:reportinvestigatesextentpublicationsdescribingiBCIindividualsmotordysfunctionimpairmentblindnessMethods:conductedJune2024PubMedWebSciencebibliographicdatabasessystematicallysearchedquerytermsfamilymembersguardiansresultsquantitativelyqualitativelyanalyzedResults:searchyielded315uniqueThirty-four43participant'ssorted5categories:Twenty-two647%34thankedacknowledgementsection617regardconsent12353%technicalmaintenanceupkeepsystemproceduralaspects9265%discussedenhancedparticipantgoal-directedbehaviorcaregiver388%generalcommentsfitcategoriesstillrelatedimportancelivesDiscussion:halfofferedrobustdiscussionsprovidevaluableinsightintegralplaysupportingAttentionsuccessfulcanguideresponsibledevelopmentfutureprotocolsresearch:bioethicsneuroethicsneuroscience

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.