An open letter concerning do-it-yourself users of transcranial direct current stimulation

The future of transcranial ultrasound as a precision brain interface

Our understanding of brain circuit operations and disorders has rapidly outpaced our ability to intervene and restore them. Developing technologies that can precisely interface with any brain region and circuit may combine diagnostics with therapeutic intervention, expediting personalised brain medicine. Transcranial ultrasound stimulation (TUS) is a promising noninvasive solution to this challenge, offering focal precision and scalability. By exploiting the biomechanics of pressure waves on brain tissue, TUS enables multi-site targeted neuromodulation across distributed circuits in the cortex and deeper areas alike. In this Essay, we explore the emergent evidence that TUS can functionally test and modify dysfunctional regions, effectively serving as a search and rescue tool for the brain. We define the challenges and opportunities faced by TUS as it moves towards greater target precision and integration with advanced brain monitoring and interventional technology. Finally, we propose a roadmap for the evolution of TUS as it progresses from a research tool to a clinically validated therapeutic for brain disorders.

An Educational Program for Remote Training and Supervision of Home-Based Transcranial Electrical Stimulation: Feasibility and Preliminary Effectiveness

OBJECTIVES

There has been recent interest in the administration of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) by a caregiver, family member, or patient themselves while in their own homes (HB-tES). The need to properly train individuals in the administration of HB-tES is essential, and the lack of a uniform training approach across studies has come to light. The primary aim of this paper is to present the HB-tES training and supervision program, a tele-supervised, instructional, and evaluation program to teach laypersons how to administer HB-tES to a participant and to provide a standardized framework for remote monitoring of participants by teaching staff. The secondary aim is to present early pilot data on the feasibility and effectiveness of the training portion of the program based on its implementation in 379 sessions between two pilot clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The program includes instructional materials, standardized tele-supervised hands-on practice sessions, and a system for remote supervision of participants by teaching staff. Nine laypersons completed the training program. Data on the feasibility and effectiveness of the program were collected.

RESULTS

No adverse events were reported during the training or any of the HB-tES sessions after the training. All laypersons successfully completed the training. The nine laypersons reported being satisfied with the training program and confident in their tES administration capabilities. This was consistent with laypersons requiring technical assistance from teaching staff very infrequently during the 379 completed sessions. The average adherence rate between all administrators was >98%, with seven of nine administrators having 100% adherence to the scheduled sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that the HB-tES program is effective and is associated with participant satisfaction.

SIGNIFICANCE

We hope that the remote nature of this training program will facilitate increased accessibility to HB-tES research for participants of different demographics and locations. This program, designed for easy adaptation to different HB-tES research applications and devices, also is accessible online. The adoption of this program is expected to facilitate uniformity of study methods among future HB-tES studies and thereby accelerate the pace of tES intervention discovery.

Chilean Supreme Court ruling on the protection of brain activity: neurorights, personal data protection, and neurodata

This paper discusses a landmark ruling by the Chilean Supreme Court of August 9, 2023 dealing with the right to mental privacy, originated with an action for constitutional protection filed on behalf of Guido Girardi Lavin against Emotiv Inc., a North American company based in San Francisco, California that is commercializing the device "Insight." This wireless device functions as a headset with sensors that collect information about the brain's electrical activity (i.e., neurodata). The discussion revolves around whether neurodata can be considered personal data and whether they could be classified into a special category. The application of the present legislation on data (the most obsolete, such as the Chilean law, and the most recent EU law) does not seem adequate to protect neurodata. The use of neurodata raises ethical and legal concerns that are not fully addressed by current regulations on personal data protection. Despite not being necessarily considered personal data, neurodata represent the most intimate aspects of human personality and should be protected in light of potential new risks. The unique characteristics of neurodata, including their interpretive nature and potential for revealing thoughts and intentions, pose challenges for regulation. Current data protection laws do not differentiate between different types of data based on their informational content, which is relevant for protecting individual rights. The development of new technologies involving neurodata requires particular attention and careful consideration to prevent possible harm to human dignity. The regulation of neurodata must account for their specific characteristics and the potential risks they pose to privacy, confidentiality, and individual rights. The answer lies in the reconfiguration of human rights known as "neurorights" that goes beyond the protection of personal data.

Ethical issues in direct-to-consumer healthcare: A scoping review

An increasing number of health products and services are being offered on a direct-to-consumer (DTC) basis. To date, however, scholarship on DTC healthcare products and services has largely proceeded in a domain-specific fashion, with discussions of relevant ethical challenges occurring within specific medical specialties. The present study therefore aimed to provide a scoping review of ethical issues raised in the academic literature across types of DTC healthcare products and services. A systematic search for relevant publications between 2011-2021 was conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar using iteratively developed search terms. The final sample included 86 publications that discussed ethical issues related to DTC healthcare products and services. All publications were coded for ethical issues mentioned, primary DTC product or service discussed, type of study, year of publication, and geographical context. We found that the types of DTC healthcare products and services mentioned in our sample spanned six categories: neurotechnology (34%), testing (20%), in-person services (17%), digital health tools (14%), telemedicine (13%), and physical interventions (2%). Ethical arguments in favor of DTC healthcare included improved access (e.g., financial, geographical; 31%), increased autonomy (29%), and enhanced convenience (16%). Commonly raised ethical concerns included insufficient regulation (72%), questionable efficacy and quality (70%), safety and physical harms (66%), misleading advertising claims (56%), and privacy (34%). Other frequently occurring ethical concerns pertained to financial costs, targeting vulnerable groups, informed consent, and potential burdens on healthcare providers, the healthcare system, and society. Our findings offer insights into the cross-cutting ethical issues associated with DTC healthcare and underscore the need for increased interdisciplinary communication to address the challenges they raise.

Remote neurocognitive interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - Opportunities and challenges

Improving neurocognitive functions through remote interventions has been a promising approach to developing new treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD). Remote neurocognitive interventions may address the shortcomings of the current prevailing pharmacological therapies for AD/HD, e.g., side effects and access barriers. Here we review the current options for remote neurocognitive interventions to reduce AD/HD symptoms, including cognitive training, EEG neurofeedback training, transcranial electrical stimulation, and external cranial nerve stimulation. We begin with an overview of the neurocognitive deficits in AD/HD to identify the targets for developing interventions. The role of neuroplasticity in each intervention is then highlighted due to its essential role in facilitating neuropsychological adaptations. Following this, each intervention type is discussed in terms of the critical details of the intervention protocols, the role of neuroplasticity, and the available evidence. Finally, we offer suggestions for future directions in terms of optimizing the existing intervention protocols and developing novel protocols.

Non-invasive cortical stimulation for drug-resistant pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neuromodulation techniques are being increasingly used to alleviate pain and enhance quality of life. Non-invasive cortical stimulation was originally intended to predict the efficacy of invasive (neurosurgical) techniques, but has now gained a place as an analgesic procedure in its own right.

RECENT FINDINGS

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): Evidence from 14 randomised, placebo-controlled trials (~750 patients) supports a significant analgesic effect of high-frequency motor cortex rTMS in neuropathic pain. Dorsolateral frontal stimulation has not proven efficacious so far. The posterior operculo-insular cortex is an attractive target but evidence remains insufficient. Short-term efficacy can be achieved with NNT (numbers needed to treat) ~2-3, but long-lasting efficacy remains a challenge.Like rTMS, transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) induces activity changes in distributed brain networks and can influence various aspects of pain. Lower cost relative to rTMS, few safety issues and availability of home-based protocols are practical advantages. The limited quality of many published reports lowers the level of evidence, which will remain uncertain until more prospective controlled studies are available.

SUMMARY

Both rTMS and tDCS act preferentially upon abnormal hyperexcitable states of pain, rather than acute or experimental pain. For both techniques, M1 appears to be the best target for chronic pain relief, and repeated sessions over relatively long periods of time may be required to obtain clinically significant benefits. Patients responsive to tDCS may differ from those improved by rTMS.

Neurofeedback on twitter: Evaluation of the scientific credibility and communication about the technique

Neurofeedback is a popular technique to induce neuroplasticity with a controversial reputation. The public discourse on neurofeedback, as a therapeutic and neuroenhancement technique, encompasses scientific communication, therapeutic expectations and outcomes, as well as complementary and alternative practices. We investigated twitter publications from 2010 to 2022 on the keyword "neurofeedback". A total of over 138 k tweets were obtained, which originated from over 42 k different users. The communication flow in the neurofeedback community is mainly unidirectional and non-interactive. Analysis of hashtags revealed application fields, therapy provider and neuroenhancement to be the most popular contents in neurofeedback communication. A group of 1221 productive users was identified, in which clinicians, entrepreneurs, broadcasters, and scientists contribute. We identified reactions to critical publications in the twitter traffic and an increase in the number of tweets by academic users which suggest an increase in the interest on the scientific credibility of neurofeedback. More intense scientific communication on neurofeedback in twitter may contribute to promote a more realistic view on challenges and advances regarding good scientific practice of neurofeedback.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in Pediatric Populations—– Voices from Typically Developing Children and Adolescents and their Parents

Background

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a brain stimulation technique currently being researched as an alternative or complimentary treatment for various neurological disorders. There is little knowledge about experiences of the participants of tDCS clinical research, especially from pediatric studies.

Methods

An interview study with typically developing minors (n = 19, mean age 13,66 years) participating in a tDCS study, and their parents (n = 18) was conducted to explore their views and experiences and inform the ethical analysis.

Results

Children (10–13 years old) and adolescents (14–18 years old) reported good experiences with the stimulation. Next to financial incentives, main motives to participate in the study were curiosity and the possibility to help develop treatments for children affected by neurological disorders. They could also see a potential of using tDCS in a non-medical setting, especially regarding the provision of equal opportunity, e.g. in education. Parents also presented a positive attitude towards tDCS and their children participation in the basic research study. Nevertheless, their understanding of tDCS was rather poor. Even though many of them understood the techniques, they often did not see the link between the (current) lack of side effects and an absence of longitudinal studies. Parents were also cautious about using tDCS for non-medical/enhancement purposes.

Conclusions

The study findings show a need for more transparent information about the state of the art of tDCS, its function and what it might be able to offer, especially considering the good acceptability of tDCS.

Mapping the Landscape of Do-it-Yourself Medicine

The practice of medicine is typically conceptualized as remaining within the boundaries of a hospital or clinic. However, in recent years, patients have been able to gain access to information about medical research as it is ongoing. As a result, there has been a rise in do-it-yourself (DIY) medicine, where individuals treat themselves for medical conditions outside of clinical settings, often mimicking experimental therapies that remain inaccessible to the wider public. For example, in DIY brain stimulation, individuals suffering from depression build at-home electrical headsets using nine-volt batteries, mimicking an experimental neuroscience technique used in scientific laboratories. In DIY fecal transplantation, those with intestinal disorders like C. Difficile and inflammatory bowel disease transplant stool from donors into themselves with the aid of blenders and enemas. In the open Artificial Pancreas System movement, diabetes patients hacked together an artificial pancreas system from their glucose monitors and insulin pumps, years before such a system was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA). To date, scholarship on DIY medicine has largely been relegated to specific medical domains (e.g., neurology, gastroenterology, infectious disease). In this paper, however, I recognize DIY medicine as a cross-cutting phenomenon that has emerged independently across medical domains but shares common features. I map the varieties of DIY medicine across these domains and suggest that four key factors lead to their creation, growth, and uptake. In doing so, this essay sheds light on an understudied area of biomedical citizen science that is likely to grow substantially in the coming decades.

Attention neuroenhancement through tDCS or neurofeedback: a randomized, single-blind, controlled trial

Neurofeedback and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) are promising techniques for neuroenhancement of attentional performance. As far as we know no study compared both techniques on attentional performance in healthy participants. We compared tDCS and neurofeedback in a randomized, single-blind, controlled experiment assessing both behavioral (accuracy and time reaction) and electrophysiological (N1, P1, and P3 components) data of participants responding to the Attention Network Task (ANT). Eighty volunteers volunteered for this study. We adopted standard protocols for both techniques, i.e., a Sensorimotor Rhythm (SMR) protocol for neurofeedback and the right DLPFC anodal stimulation for tDCS, applied over nine sessions (two weeks). We did not find significant differences between treatment groups on ANT, neither at the behavioral nor at the electrophysiological levels. However, we found that participants from both neuromodulation groups, irrespective of if active or sham, reported attentional improvements in response to the treatment on a subjective scale. Our study adds another null result to the neuromodulation literature, showing that neurofeedback and tDCS effects are more complex than previously suggested and associated with placebo effect. More studies in neuroenhancement literature are necessary to fully comprehend neuromodulation mechanisms.

Non-invasive brain stimulation and neuroenhancement

Attempts to enhance human memory and learning ability have a long tradition in science. This topic has recently gained substantial attention because of the increasing percentage of older individuals worldwide and the predicted rise of age-associated cognitive decline in brain functions. Transcranial brain stimulation methods, such as transcranial magnetic (TMS) and transcranial electric (tES) stimulation, have been extensively used in an effort to improve cognitive functions in humans. Here we summarize the available data on low-intensity tES for this purpose, in comparison to repetitive TMS and some pharmacological agents, such as caffeine and nicotine. There is no single area in the brain stimulation field in which only positive outcomes have been reported. For self-directed tES devices, how to restrict variability with regard to efficacy is an essential aspect of device design and function. As with any technique, reproducible outcomes depend on the equipment and how well this is matched to the experience and skill of the operator. For self-administered non-invasive brain stimulation, this requires device designs that rigorously incorporate human operator factors. The wide parameter space of non-invasive brain stimulation, including dose (e.g., duration, intensity (current density), number of repetitions), inclusion/exclusion (e.g., subject's age), and homeostatic effects, administration of tasks before and during stimulation, and, most importantly, placebo or nocebo effects, have to be taken into account. The outcomes of stimulation are expected to depend on these parameters and should be strictly controlled. The consensus among experts is that low-intensity tES is safe as long as tested and accepted protocols (including, for example, dose, inclusion/exclusion) are followed and devices are used which follow established engineering risk-management procedures. Devices and protocols that allow stimulation outside these parameters cannot claim to be "safe" where they are applying stimulation beyond that examined in published studies that also investigated potential side effects. Brain stimulation devices marketed for consumer use are distinct from medical devices because they do not make medical claims and are therefore not necessarily subject to the same level of regulation as medical devices (i.e., by government agencies tasked with regulating medical devices). Manufacturers must follow ethical and best practices in marketing tES stimulators, including not misleading users by referencing effects from human trials using devices and protocols not similar to theirs.

Event-Related Potentials as Markers of Efficacy for Combined Working Memory Training and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Regimens: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Our brains are often under pressure to process a continuous flow of information in a short time, therefore facing a constantly increasing demand for cognitive resources. Recent studies have highlighted that a lasting improvement of cognitive functions may be achieved by exploiting plasticity, i.e., the brain’s ability to adapt to the ever-changing cognitive demands imposed by the environment. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), when combined with cognitive training, can promote plasticity, amplify training gains and their maintenance over time. The availability of low-cost wearable devices has made these approaches more feasible, albeit the effectiveness of combined training regimens is still unclear. To quantify the effectiveness of such protocols, many researchers have focused on behavioral measures such as accuracy or reaction time. These variables only return a global, non-specific picture of the underlying cognitive process. Electrophysiology instead has the finer grained resolution required to shed new light on the time course of the events underpinning processes critical to cognitive control, and if and how these processes are modulated by concurrent tDCS. To the best of our knowledge, research in this direction is still very limited. We investigate the electrophysiological correlates of combined 3-day working memory training and non-invasive brain stimulation in young adults. We focus on event-related potentials (ERPs), instead of other features such as oscillations or connectivity, because components can be measured on as little as one electrode. ERP components are, therefore, well suited for use with home devices, usually equipped with a limited number of recording channels. We consider short-, mid-, and long-latency components typically elicited by working memory tasks and assess if and how the amplitude of these components are modulated by the combined training regimen. We found no significant effects of tDCS either behaviorally or in brain activity, as measured by ERPs. We concluded that either tDCS was ineffective (because of the specific protocol or the sample under consideration, i.e., young adults) or brain-related changes, if present, were too subtle. Therefore, we suggest that other measures of brain activity may be more appropriate/sensitive to training- and/or tDCS-induced modulations, such as network connectivity, especially in young adults.

Researchers' Ethical Concerns About Using Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation for Enhancement

The capacity of next-generation closed-loop or adaptive deep brain stimulation devices (aDBS) to read (measure neural activity) and write (stimulate brain regions or circuits) shows great potential to effectively manage movement, seizure, and psychiatric disorders, and also raises the possibility of using aDBS to electively (non-therapeutically) modulate mood, cognition, and prosociality. What separates aDBS from most neurotechnologies (e.g. transcranial stimulation) currently used for enhancement is that aDBS remains an invasive, surgically-implanted technology with a risk-benefit ratio significantly different when applied to diseased versus non-diseased individuals. Despite a large discourse about the ethics of enhancement, no empirical studies yet examine perspectives on enhancement from within the aDBS research community. We interviewed 23 aDBS researchers about their attitudes toward expanding aDBS use for enhancement. A thematic content analysis revealed that researchers share ethical concerns related to (1) safety and security; (2) enhancement as unnecessary, unnatural or aberrant; and (3) fairness, equality, and distributive justice. Most (70%) researchers felt that enhancement applications for DBS will eventually be technically feasible and that attempts to develop such applications for DBS are already happening (particularly for military purposes). However, researchers unanimously (100%) felt that DBS ideally should not be considered for enhancement until researchers better understand brain target localization and functioning. While many researchers acknowledged controversies highlighted by scholars and ethicists, such as potential impacts on personhood, authenticity, autonomy and privacy, their ethical concerns reflect considerations of both gravity and perceived near-term likelihood.

Cortical stimulation for chronic pain: from anecdote to evidence

Epidural stimulation of the motor cortex (eMCS) was devised in the 1990's, and has now largely supplanted thalamic stimulation for neuropathic pain relief. Its mechanisms of action involve activation of multiple cortico-subcortical areas initiated in the thalamus, with involvement of endogenous opioids and descending inhibition toward the spinal cord. Evidence for clinical efficacy is now supported by at least seven RCTs; benefits may persist up to 10 years, and can be reasonably predicted by preoperative use of non-invasive repetitive magnetic stimulation (rTMS). rTMS first developed as a means of predicting the efficacy of epidural procedures, then as an analgesic method on its own right. Reasonable evidence from at least six well-conducted RCTs favors a significant analgesic effect of high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex in neuropathic pain (NP), and less consistently in widespread/fibromyalgic pain. Stimulation of the dorsolateral frontal cortex (DLPFC) has not proven efficacious for pain, so far. The posterior operculo-insular cortex is a new and attractive target but evidence remains inconsistent. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is applied upon similar targets as rTMS and eMCS; it does not elicit action potentials but modulates the neuronal resting membrane state. tDCS presents practical advantages including low cost, few safety issues, and possibility of home-based protocols; however, the limited quality of most published reports entails a low level of evidence. Patients responsive to tDCS may differ from those improved by rTMS, and in both cases repeated sessions over a long time may be required to achieve clinically significant relief. Both invasive and non-invasive procedures exert their effects through multiple distributed brain networks influencing the sensory, affective and cognitive aspects of chronic pain. Their effects are mainly exerted upon abnormally sensitized pathways, rather than on acute physiological pain. Extending the duration of long-term benefits remains a challenge, for which different strategies are discussed in this review.

Influencing Human Behavior with Noninvasive Brain Stimulation: Direct Human Brain Manipulation Revisited

The use of tools to perturb brain activity can generate important insights into brain physiology and offer valuable therapeutic approaches for brain disorders. Furthermore, the potential of such tools to enhance normal behavior has become increasingly recognized, and this has led to the development of various noninvasive technologies that provides a broader access to the human brain. While providing a brief survey of brain manipulation procedures used in the past decades, this review aims at stimulating an informed discussion on the use of these new technologies to investigate the human. It highlights the importance to revisit the past use of this unique armamentarium and proceed to a detailed analysis of its present state, especially in regard to human behavioral regulation.

Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines

This article is based on a consensus conference, promoted and supported by the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN), which took place in Siena (Italy) in October 2018. The meeting intended to update the ten-year-old safety guidelines for the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical settings (Rossi et al., 2009). Therefore, only emerging and new issues are covered in detail, leaving still valid the 2009 recommendations regarding the description of conventional or patterned TMS protocols, the screening of subjects/patients, the need of neurophysiological monitoring for new protocols, the utilization of reference thresholds of stimulation, the managing of seizures and the list of minor side effects. New issues discussed in detail from the meeting up to April 2020 are safety issues of recently developed stimulation devices and pulse configurations; duties and responsibility of device makers; novel scenarios of TMS applications such as in the neuroimaging context or imaging-guided and robot-guided TMS; TMS interleaved with transcranial electrical stimulation; safety during paired associative stimulation interventions; and risks of using TMS to induce therapeutic seizures (magnetic seizure therapy). An update on the possible induction of seizures, theoretically the most serious risk of TMS, is provided. It has become apparent that such a risk is low, even in patients taking drugs acting on the central nervous system, at least with the use of traditional stimulation parameters and focal coils for which large data sets are available. Finally, new operational guidelines are provided for safety in planning future trials based on traditional and patterned TMS protocols, as well as a summary of the minimal training requirements for operators, and a note on ethics of neuroenhancement.

An Integrative Clustering Approach to tDCS Individual Response Variability in Cognitive Performance: Beyond a Null Effect on Working Memory

Despite the growing interest in the use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for the modulation of human cognitive function, there are contradictory findings regarding the cognitive benefits of this technique. Inter-individual response variability to tDCS may play a significant role. We explored the effects of anodal versus sham tDCS over the left prefrontal cortex (LPFC) on working memory performance, taking into account the inter-individual variability. Twenty-nine healthy volunteers received an 'offline' anodal tDCS (1.5 mA, 15 min) to the left prefrontal cortex (F3 electrode site) in an intra-individual, cross-over, sham-controlled experimental design. n-back and Sternberg task performance was assessed before (baseline), immediately after tDCS administration (T1) and 5 min post-T1 (T2). We applied an integrative clustering approach to characterize both the group and individual responses to tDCS, as well as identifying naturally occurring subgroups that may be present within the total sample. Anodal tDCS failed to improve working memory performance in the total sample. Cluster analysis identified a subgroup of 'responders' who significantly improved their performance after anodal (vs. sham) stimulation, although not to a greater extent than the best baseline or sham condition. The proportion of 'responders' ranged from 15% to 59% across task conditions and behavioral outputs. Our findings show a high inter-individual variability of the tDCS response, suggesting that the use of tCDS may not be an effective tool to improve working memory performance in healthy subjects. We propose that the use of clustering methods is more suitable in identifying 'responders' and for evaluating the efficacy of this technique.

Does neuromodulation transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) associated with peripheral stimulation through exercise to walk have an impact on falls in people with Parkinson's disease?

Parkinson's disease (PD) is one of the most prevalent neurodegenerative diseases in the world, with a high degree of disability. Among the various therapeutic possibilities, brain stimulation appears in a promising approach, with deep brain stimulation (DBS) being the best described and successful, yet it has the limitation of being invasive. In this context we present transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive treatment that brings a new perspective when thinking about treatment of neurological diseases. It is easy to handle, low cost, few side effects and good adherence to patients. TDCS presents good evidence for clinical practice, but when it comes to PD the results obtained are inconclusive and some protocols have not yet been tested. In this hypothesis we propose that the use of tDCS applied in the supplemental motor areas, together with a gait training, can facilitate the motor learning and modulate the neurons for better potentiation of the exercises together with patients with walking difficulties due to PD.

Dimensions of Ethical Direct-to-Consumer Neurotechnologies

The direct-to-consumer (DTC) neurotechnology market, which includes some brain-computer interfaces, neurostimulation devices, virtual reality systems, wearables, and smartphone apps is rapidly growing. Given this technology's intimate relationship with the brain, a number of ethical dimensions must be addressed so that the technology can achieve the goal of contributing to human flourishing. This paper identifies safety, transparency, privacy, epistemic appropriateness, existential authenticity, just distribution, and oversight as such dimensions. After an initial exploration of the relevant ethical foundations for DTC neurotechnologies, this paper lays out each dimension and uses examples to justify its inclusion.

Owning Ethical Innovation: Claims about Commercial Wearable Brain Technologies

The wearable neurotechnology market targets consumers with promises of cognitive benefit and personal wellness. Scientific evidence is essential to substantiate claims about utility, safety, and efficacy and for informed choice and public trust.

Neural and Psychological Predictors of Cognitive Enhancement and Impairment from Neurostimulation

Modulating the temporoparietal junction (TPJ), especially the right counterpart, shows promises in enhancing social cognitive ability. However, it is ambiguous whether the functional lateralization of TPJ determines people's responsiveness to brain stimulation. Here, this issue is investigated with an individual difference approach. Forty-five participants attended three sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) experiments and one neuroimaging session. The results support the symmetric mechanism of left and right TPJ stimulation. First, the left and right TPJ stimulation effect are comparable in the group-level analysis. Second, the individual-level analysis reveals that a less right-lateralized TPJ is associated with a higher level of responsiveness. Participants could be classified into positive responders showing cognitive enhancement and negative responders showing cognitive impairment due to stimulation. The positive responders show weaker connectivity between bilateral TPJ and the medial prefrontal cortex, which mediates the prediction of offline responsiveness by the lateralization and the social-related trait. These findings call for a better characterization and predictive models for whom tDCS should be used for, and highlight the necessity and feasibility of prestimulation screening.

Exploring the effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation over the prefrontal cortex on working memory: A cluster analysis approach

BACKGROUND

The interest in the use of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for the enhancement of cognitive functioning has increased significantly in recent years. However, the efficacy of this technique remains to be established.

OBJECTIVE

The current study explored the effects of anodal vs. sham tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) during the performance of the digit span backwards task.

METHODS

30 healthy participants received 'offline' anodal tDCS (1.5 mA, 15 min) to the left DLPFC in an intra-individual, cross-over, sham-controlled experimental design. Memory span performance was assessed before (baseline), immediately after tDCS administration (T1) and 10 min post-T1 (T2). We applied cluster analysis in order to characterize individual responses to tDCS, and in order to identify naturally occurring subgroups that may be present.

RESULTS

Analysis of all the subjects showed that anodal tDCS failed to improve memory span performance. Cluster analysis revealed the presence of a subgroup of 'responders' that significantly improved their performance after anodal (vs. sham) tDCS in T1 (47%) and T2 (46%). However, there was no significant improvement in performance after anodal tDCS compared to the best baseline performance.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that tDCS does not improve memory span performance and highlights the need for better ways to optimize methodological approaches in order to account for inter-individual variability and accurately assess the evidential value of tDCS-linked cognitive outcomes.

Ethical Challenges of Risk, Informed Consent, and Posttrial Responsibilities in Human Research With Neural Devices: A Review

Importance

Developing more and better diagnostic and therapeutic tools for central nervous system disorders is an ethical imperative. Human research with neural devices is important to this effort and a critical focus of the National Institutes of Health Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. Despite regulations and standard practices for conducting ethical research, researchers and others seek more guidance on how to ethically conduct neural device studies. This article draws on, reviews, specifies, and interprets existing ethical frameworks, literature, and subject matter expertise to address 3 specific ethical challenges in neural devices research: analysis of risk, informed consent, and posttrial responsibilities to research participants.

Observations

Research with humans proceeds after careful assessment of the risks and benefits. In assessing whether risks are justified by potential benefits in both invasive and noninvasive neural device research, the following categories of potential risks should be considered: those related to surgery, hardware, stimulation, research itself, privacy and security, and financial burdens. All 3 of the standard pillars of informed consent-disclosure, capacity, and voluntariness-raise challenges in neural device research. Among these challenges are the need to plan for appropriate disclosure of information about atypical and emerging risks of neural devices, a structured evaluation of capacity when that is in doubt, and preventing patients from feeling unduly pressured to participate. Researchers and funders should anticipate participants' posttrial needs linked to study participation and take reasonable steps to facilitate continued access to neural devices that benefit participants. Possible mechanisms for doing so are explored here. Depending on the study, researchers and funders may have further posttrial responsibilities.

Conclusions and Relevance

This ethical analysis and points to consider may assist researchers, institutional review boards, funders, and others engaged in human neural device research.

At-Home Cortical Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain: a Feasibility Study with Initial Clinical Results

The clinical use of noninvasive cortical stimulation procedures is hampered by the limited duration of the analgesic effects and the need to perform stimulation in hospital settings. Here, we tested the feasibility and pilot efficacy of an internet-based system for at-home, long-duration, medically controlled transcranial motor cortex stimulation (H-tDCS), via a double-blinded, sham-controlled trial in patients with neuropathic pain refractory to standard-of-care drug therapy. Each patient was first trained at hospital, received a stimulation kit, allotted a password-protected Web space, and completed daily tDCS sessions during 5 weeks, via a Bluetooth connection between stimulator and a minilaptop. Each session was validated and internet-controlled by hospital personnel. Daily pain ratings were obtained during 11 consecutive weeks, and afterwards via iterative visits/phone contacts. Twenty full procedures were completed in 12 consecutive patients (500 daily tDCS sessions, including 20% sham). No serious adverse effects were recorded. Superficial burning at electrode position occurred in 2 patients, and nausea/headache in two others, all of whom wished to pursue stimulation. Six out of the 12 patients achieved satisfactory relief on a scale combining pain scores, drug intake, and quality of life. Daily pain reports correlated with such combined assessment, and differentiated responders from nonresponders without overlap. Clinical improvement in responders could last up to 6 months. Five patients asked to repeat the whole procedure when pain resumed again, with comparable results. At-home, long-duration tDCS proved safe and technically feasible, and provided long-lasting relief in 50% of a small sample of patients with drug-resistant neuropathic pain.

Modulating Applied Task Performance via Transcranial Electrical Stimulation

Basic and applied research are increasingly adopting transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) for modulating perceptual, cognitive, affective, and motor processes. Industry and defense applications of tES hold potential for accelerating training and knowledge acquisition and sustaining work-related performance in the face of fatigue, workload, and stress. This mini-review article describes the promises and perils of tES, and reviews research testing its influence on two broad applied areas: sustaining and dividing attention, and operating in virtual environments. Also included is a discussion of challenges related to viable mechanistic explanations for tES effectiveness, attempts at replication and consideration of null results, and the potential importance of individual differences in predicting tES influences on human performance. Finally, future research directions are proposed to address these challenges and help develop a fuller understanding of tES viability for enhancing real-world performance.

Neurotechnologies for Human Cognitive Augmentation: Current State of the Art and Future Prospects

Recent advances in neuroscience have paved the way to innovative applications that cognitively augment and enhance humans in a variety of contexts. This paper aims at providing a snapshot of the current state of the art and a motivated forecast of the most likely developments in the next two decades. Firstly, we survey the main neuroscience technologies for both observing and influencing brain activity, which are necessary ingredients for human cognitive augmentation. We also compare and contrast such technologies, as their individual characteristics (e.g., spatio-temporal resolution, invasiveness, portability, energy requirements, and cost) influence their current and future role in human cognitive augmentation. Secondly, we chart the state of the art on neurotechnologies for human cognitive augmentation, keeping an eye both on the applications that already exist and those that are emerging or are likely to emerge in the next two decades. Particularly, we consider applications in the areas of communication, cognitive enhancement, memory, attention monitoring/enhancement, situation awareness and complex problem solving, and we look at what fraction of the population might benefit from such technologies and at the demands they impose in terms of user training. Thirdly, we briefly review the ethical issues associated with current neuroscience technologies. These are important because they may differentially influence both present and future research on (and adoption of) neurotechnologies for human cognitive augmentation: an inferior technology with no significant ethical issues may thrive while a superior technology causing widespread ethical concerns may end up being outlawed. Finally, based on the lessons learned in our analysis, using past trends and considering other related forecasts, we attempt to forecast the most likely future developments of neuroscience technology for human cognitive augmentation and provide informed recommendations for promising future research and exploitation avenues.

Tele-monitored tDCS rehabilitation: feasibility, challenges and future perspectives in Parkinson's disease

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a modality of non-invasive brain stimulation involving the application of low amplitude direct current via surface electrodes on the scalp. tDCS has been studied in healthy populations and in multiple brain disorders and has the potential to be a treatment for several neuropsychiatric conditions by virtue of its capability of influencing cognitive, motor and behavioral processes. tDCS is a generally safe technique when performed within standardized protocols in research or clinical settings. Furthermore, tDCS portability, high acceptability and user-friendly interface makes it highly appealing for telemedicine practices. The term "telemedicine" refers to the procedures, educational strategies, and care services that are remotely administered by means of different communication technologies, with the final goal of increasing access to care for individuals and for improving public health. The use of telemedicine combined with tDCS protocols is increasing, although the safety of this approach in different clinical settings awaits further assessment. While "do-it-yourself" tDCS should be discouraged due to the unknown risk of adverse events, the implementation of tele-monitored tDCS (tele-tDCS) within standardized frameworks ensuring safety, tolerability, and reproducibility may allow this technology to reach larger clinical populations and bypass some of the common barriers preventing access to health services and clinical trials. This review will discuss the current evidence supporting the feasibility of tele-tDCS paradigms and their therapeutic potential, with particular emphasis on the implications for patients with Parkinson's disease.

Oversight of direct-to-consumer neurotechnologies

Efficacy of products is far from clear

Examining the Interactions Between Expectations and tDCS Effects on Motor and Cognitive Performance

Background: Despite a growing literature and commercial market, the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) remains questionable. Notably, studies rarely examine factors such as expectations of outcomes, which may influence tDCS response through placebo-like effects. Here we sought to determine whether expectations could influence the behavioral outcomes of a tDCS intervention. Methods: Through an initial study and self-replication, we recruited 121 naïve young adults 18-34 years of age (M = 21.14, SD = 3.58; 88 women). We evaluated expectations of tDCS and of motor and cognitive performance at three times: (i) at baseline; (ii) after being primed to have High or Low expectations of outcomes; and (iii) after a single session of sham-controlled anodal tDCS over the left or right motor cortex. Before and after stimulation, participants performed the Grooved Pegboard Test and a choice reaction time task as measures of motor dexterity, response time, and response inhibition. Results: Repeated measures ANOVA revealed that participants had varying, largely uncertain, expectations regarding tDCS effectiveness at baseline. Expectation ratings significantly increased or decreased in response to High or Low priming, respectively, and decreased following the intervention. Response times and accuracy on motor and cognitive measures were largely unaffected by expectation or stimulation conditions. Overall, our analysis revealed no effect attributable to baseline expectations, belief of group assignment, or experimental condition on behavioral outcomes. Subjective experience did not differ based on expectation or stimulation condition. Conclusions: Our results suggest no clear effects of tDCS or of expectations on our performance measures, highlighting the need for further investigations of such stimulation methods.

Developing Next-generation Brain Sensing Technologies - A Review

Advances in sensing technology raise the possibility of creating neural interfaces that can more effectively restore or repair neural function and reveal fundamental properties of neural information processing. To realize the potential of these bioelectronic devices, it is necessary to understand the capabilities of emerging technologies and identify the best strategies to translate these technologies into products and therapies that will improve the lives of patients with neurological and other disorders. Here we discuss emerging technologies for sensing brain activity, anticipated challenges for translation, and perspectives for how to best transition these technologies from academic research labs to useful products for neuroscience researchers and human patients.

Brain stimulation and physical performance

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques have been used for decades to study brain function and for the treatment of various neurological disease. These techniques involve the passage of electrical current or magnetic field in a controlled manner to a targeted brain area. Recently, experimental studies explored the application of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for the improvement of physical performance in healthy individuals. In this chapter we reviewed and analyzed the current scientific literature, highlighted methodological limitations and also suggested possible neurophysiological mechanisms. The chapter also provides some technical and theoretical research-based principles for future research, to promote a better understanding of potential and caveats of this emerging field. Finally, ethical and regulatory issues related to performance enhancement via non-invasive brain stimulation are also discussed.

Moral attitudes and willingness to enhance and repair cognition with brain stimulation

BACKGROUND

The availability of technological means to enhance and repair human cognitive function raises questions about the perceived morality of their use. However, we have limited knowledge about the public's intuitive attitudes toward uses of brain stimulation. Studies that enlighten us about the public's willingness to endorse specific uses of brain stimulation on themselves and others could provide a basis to understand the moral psychology guiding intuitions about neuromodulation and opportunities to inform public education and public policy.

OBJECTIVE

Hypothesis: We expected that subjects would be less willing to enhance or repair cognitive functions perceived as more "core" to "authentic" self-identity, prioritize brain stimulation uses for themselves, and more willing to enhance "core" functions in others. Across specific hypothetical uses, we expected the moral acceptability of specific uses to be associated with subjects' willingness to endorse them.

METHODS

We administered two surveys to the public in which subjects were asked to report how willing they would be to enhance or repair specific cognitive abilities using a hypothetical brain stimulation device called "Ceremode".

RESULTS

Among 894 subjects, we found that subjects were more willing to use technologies to repair other people than themselves. They were most inclined to repair core functions in others. Subjects' ratings of the moral acceptability of specific uses was related to their reported willingness to use brain stimulation.

CONCLUSION

Moral acceptability is related to the public's willingness to use brain stimulation. These findings suggest that the public endorses a generous approach to applying brain stimulation for cognitive gains in others. Further, this study establishes a basis to guide moral psychological studies of cognitive modification and social processes that guide attitudes toward and uses of brain stimulation.

Why Frankenstein is a Stigma Among Scientists

As one of the best known science narratives about the consequences of creating life, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (1818) is an enduring tale that people know and understand with an almost instinctive familiarity. It has become a myth reflecting people's ambivalent feelings about emerging science: they are curious about science, but they are also afraid of what science can do to them. In this essay, we argue that the Frankenstein myth has evolved into a stigma attached to scientists that focalizes the public's as well as the scientific community's negative reactions towards certain sciences and scientific practices. This stigma produces ambivalent reactions towards scientific artifacts and it leads to negative connotations because it implies that some sciences are dangerous and harmful. We argue that understanding the Frankenstein stigma can empower scientists by helping them revisit their own biases as well as responding effectively to people's expectations for, and attitudes towards, scientists and scientific artifacts. Debunking the Frankenstein stigma could also allow scientists to reshape their professional identities so they can better show the public what ethical and moral values guide their research enterprises.

Technological Approaches for Neurorehabilitation: From Robotic Devices to Brain Stimulation and Beyond

Neurological diseases causing motor/cognitive impairments are among the most common causes of adult-onset disability. More than one billion of people are affected worldwide, and this number is expected to increase in upcoming years, because of the rapidly aging population. The frequent lack of complete recovery makes it desirable to develop novel neurorehabilitative treatments, suited to the patients, and better targeting the specific disability. To date, rehabilitation therapy can be aided by the technological support of robotic-based therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, and neural interfaces. In this perspective, we will review the above methods by referring to the most recent advances in each field. Then, we propose and discuss current and future approaches based on the combination of the above. As pointed out in the recent literature, by combining traditional rehabilitation techniques with neuromodulation, biofeedback recordings and/or novel robotic and wearable assistive devices, several studies have proven it is possible to sensibly improve the amount of recovery with respect to traditional treatments. We will then discuss the possible applied research directions to maximize the outcome of a neurorehabilitation therapy, which should include the personalization of the therapy based on patient and clinician needs and preferences.

Studying and modifying brain function with non-invasive brain stimulation

In the past three decades, our understanding of brain-behavior relationships has been significantly shaped by research using non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques. These methods allow non-invasive and safe modulation of neural processes in the healthy brain, enabling researchers to directly study how experimentally altered neural activity causally affects behavior. This unique property of NIBS methods has, on the one hand, led to groundbreaking findings on the brain basis of various aspects of behavior and has raised interest in possible clinical and practical applications of these methods. On the other hand, it has also triggered increasingly critical debates about the properties and possible limitations of these methods. In this review, we discuss these issues, clarify the challenges associated with the use of currently available NIBS techniques for basic research and practical applications, and provide recommendations for studies using NIBS techniques to establish brain-behavior relationships.

The Illusion of the Perfect Brain Enhancer

Many questions loom over transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive form of neurostimulation in which constant, low current is delivered directly to areas of the brain using small electrodes. It was first established in neuroscience research in the 1950s and 60s, but has seen rapid growth, particularly in the last five years. Originally developed to help patients with brain injuries such as strokes, tDCS is now also used to enhance language and mathematical ability, attention span, problem solving, memory, coordination, and even gaming skills. The authors examine its potential and pitfalls.

Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines

Low intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) in humans, encompassing transcranial direct current (tDCS), transcutaneous spinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS), transcranial alternating current (tACS), and transcranial random noise (tRNS) stimulation or their combinations, appears to be safe. No serious adverse events (SAEs) have been reported so far in over 18,000 sessions administered to healthy subjects, neurological and psychiatric patients, as summarized here. Moderate adverse events (AEs), as defined by the necessity to intervene, are rare, and include skin burns with tDCS due to suboptimal electrode-skin contact. Very rarely mania or hypomania was induced in patients with depression (11 documented cases), yet a causal relationship is difficult to prove because of the low incidence rate and limited numbers of subjects in controlled trials. Mild AEs (MAEs) include headache and fatigue following stimulation as well as prickling and burning sensations occurring during tDCS at peak-to-baseline intensities of 1-2mA and during tACS at higher peak-to-peak intensities above 2mA. The prevalence of published AEs is different in studies specifically assessing AEs vs. those not assessing them, being higher in the former. AEs are frequently reported by individuals receiving placebo stimulation. The profile of AEs in terms of frequency, magnitude and type is comparable in healthy and clinical populations, and this is also the case for more vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly persons, or pregnant women. Combined interventions (e.g., co-application of drugs, electrophysiological measurements, neuroimaging) were not associated with further safety issues. Safety is established for low-intensity 'conventional' TES defined as <4mA, up to 60min duration per day. Animal studies and modeling evidence indicate that brain injury could occur at predicted current densities in the brain of 6.3-13A/m2 that are over an order of magnitude above those produced by tDCS in humans. Using AC stimulation fewer AEs were reported compared to DC. In specific paradigms with amplitudes of up to 10mA, frequencies in the kHz range appear to be safe. In this paper we provide structured interviews and recommend their use in future controlled studies, in particular when trying to extend the parameters applied. We also discuss recent regulatory issues, reporting practices and ethical issues. These recommendations achieved consensus in a meeting, which took place in Göttingen, Germany, on September 6-7, 2016 and were refined thereafter by email correspondence.

Low-Intensity Transcranial Current Stimulation in Psychiatry

Neurostimulation is rapidly emerging as an important treatment modality for psychiatric disorders. One of the fastest-growing and least-regulated approaches to noninvasive therapeutic stimulation involves the application of weak electrical currents. Widespread enthusiasm for low-intensity transcranial electrical current stimulation (tCS) is reflected by the recent surge in direct-to-consumer device marketing, do-it-yourself enthusiasm, and an escalating number of clinical trials. In the wake of this rapid growth, clinicians may lack sufficient information about tCS to inform their clinical practices. Interpretation of tCS clinical trial data is aided by familiarity with basic neurophysiological principles, potential mechanisms of action of tCS, and the complicated regulatory history governing tCS devices. A growing literature includes randomized controlled trials of tCS for major depression, schizophrenia, cognitive disorders, and substance use disorders. The relative ease of use and abundant access to tCS may represent a broad-reaching and important advance for future mental health care. Evidence supports application of one type of tCS, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), for major depression. However, tDCS devices do not have regulatory approval for treating medical disorders, evidence is largely inconclusive for other therapeutic areas, and their use is associated with some physical and psychiatric risks. One unexpected finding to arise from this review is that the use of cranial electrotherapy stimulation devices-the only category of tCS devices cleared for use in psychiatric disorders-is supported by low-quality evidence.

Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Personal Identity: Ethical Considerations

As noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) technology advances, these methods may become increasingly capable of influencing complex networks of mental functioning. We suggest that these might include cognitive and affective processes underlying personality and belief systems, which would raise important questions concerning personal identity and autonomy. We give particular attention to the relationship between personal identity and belief, emphasizing the importance of respecting users' personal values. We posit that research participants and patients should be encouraged to take an active approach to considering the personal implications of altering their own cognition, particularly in cases of neurocognitive "enhancement." We suggest that efforts to encourage careful consideration through the informed consent process would contribute usefully to studies and treatments that use NIBS.

The Social Context of "Do-It-Yourself" Brain Stimulation: Neurohackers, Biohackers, and Lifehackers

The "do-it-yourself" (DIY) brain stimulation movement began in earnest in late 2011, when lay individuals began building stimulation devices and applying low levels of electricity to their heads for self-improvement purposes. To date, scholarship on the home use of brain stimulation has focused on characterizing the practices of users via quantitative and qualitative studies, and on analyzing related ethical and regulatory issues. In this perspective piece, however, I take the opposite approach: rather than viewing the home use of brain stimulation on its own, I argue that it must be understood within the context of other DIY and citizen science movements. Seen in this light, the home use of brain stimulation is only a small part of the "neurohacking" movement, which is comprised of individuals attempting to optimize their brains to achieve enhanced performance. Neurohacking itself is an offshoot of the "life hacking" (or "quantified self") movement, in which individuals self-track minute aspects of their daily lives in order to enhance productivity or performance. Additionally, the home or DIY use of brain stimulation is in many ways parallel to the DIY Biology (or "biohacking") movement, which seeks to democratize tools of scientific experimentation. Here, I describe the place of the home use of brain stimulation with regard to neurohackers, lifehackers, and biohackers, and suggest that a policy approach for the home use of brain stimulation should have an appreciation both of individual motivations as well as the broader social context of the movement itself.