Open Access

A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: part 3 – “second tradition neuroethics” – ethical issues in neuroscience

Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine201611:7

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-016-0037-1

Received: 18 July 2016

Accepted: 18 July 2016

Published: 19 September 2016

Abstract

Background

Neuroethics describes several interdisciplinary topics exploring the application and implications of engaging neuroscience in societal contexts. To explore this topic, we present Part 3 of a four-part bibliography of neuroethics’ literature focusing on the “ethics of neuroscience.”

Methods

To complete a systematic survey of the neuroethics literature, 19 databases and 4 individual open-access journals were employed. Searches were conducted using the indexing language of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM). A Python code was used to eliminate duplications in the final bibliography.

Results

This bibliography consists of 1137 papers, 56 books, and 134 book chapters published from 2002 through 2014, covering ethical issues in neuroimaging, neurogenetics, neurobiomarkers, neuro-psychopharmacology, brain stimulation, neural stem cells, neural tissue transplants, pediatric-specific issues, dual-use, and general neuroscience research issues. These works contain explanations of recent research regarding neurotechnology, while exploring ethical issues in future discoveries and use.

Keywords

Neuroethics Neuroscience Neurotechnology Ethics Bibliography

Introduction and background

As a discipline, neuroethics addresses and engages a number of topics that are generated by the intersection of brain science and applications in philosophy, medicine, law, public life, and society (on the local and global scales). In Part 2 of this bibliography [1], we provided a list of works in the scholarly literature that address the neuroscientific basis of moral decision-making and actions, viz.- what Roskies somewhat colloquially refers to as the “neuroscience of ethics” [2]. In Part 3, we herein present a listing of works that discuss the “ethics of neuroscience,” namely those issues, questions and dilemmas generated by current and proposed neuroscientific research and its varied uses. The following bibliographies provide systematic surveys from 2002 to 2014 of the neuroethics literature on translational neuroscience, from “bench to bedside – and beyond” [3, 4] To be sure, the topics are numerous, and list of works is long, and include the following subjects:
  • General issues in neuroscience research

  • Neuroimaging

  • Neurogenetics

  • Neurobiomarkers

  • Neuro-psychopharmacology
    1. a)

      anti-depressants; antipsychotic and nootropic agents

       
    2. b)

      anti-anxiety agents

       
    3. c)

      analgesics

       
  • Brain stimulation/neuromodulation
    1. a)

      neurofeedback

       
    2. b)

      transcranial brain stimulation/neuromodulation

      (i.e.: transcranial direct current stimulation,tDCS; transcranial alternating current stimulation, tACS; and transcranial magnetic stimulation, TMS)

       
    3. c)

      deep brain stimulation (DBS)

       
    4. d)

      brain-machine interfaces and neural prosthetics

       
  • Neural stem cells and tissue transplants

  • Issues concerning pediatric subjects/patients

  • Dual-use neuroscientific research

The topics covered involve defining the ethical issues at hand, assessing patient outcomes, and deliberating on quality of life considerations. These neuroethical deliberations also focus on philosophical concepts such as personhood, authenticity, and identity [5, 6]. As an analytical approach and discipline, neuroethics is both pragmatic and pluralistic in its focus and scope [7]. The pragmatism inherent in neuroethics acknowledges “…the contingency of any/all neuroscientific knowledge, and an advocacy for its use mutatis mutandis, irrespective of whatever field” to which brain science is applied [8]. In its pluralistic stance, neuroethics is increasingly oriented toward, acknowledging and respectful of, and employing multi-cultural perspectives, ideas, values, needs, contexts and methods, as relevant to the realities of international neuroscientific research and use upon the twenty first century world stage [913].

As with Parts 1 and 2, we regard this as a “participatory bibliography” to which readers are encouraged to submit additional cites via the “Comments” section of this paper, or by contacting the bibliographic manager at bioethics@georgetown.edu. Through this process, the bibliography can be and remain as current and accurate as possible, so as to keep pace with ongoing developments in neuroscience, their translational use(s) in practice, and the ethical discourses and debates they foster.

Methods

Methods for systematically searching relevant literature devoted to neuroethics are identical to those utilized in Parts 1 and 2 of this bibliography [1, 14]. The United States National Library of Medicine’s (NLM) indexing language–MeSH (Medical Subject Headings)–was used to generate the basic search strategy for each topic. MeSH contains ethics-related terms developed for BIOETHICSLINE, a specialty database devoted to bioethical issues produced for NLM by the Kennedy Institute of Ethics from 1975 to 2000.

The following databases were utilized:
  1. 1)
     
  2. 2)
     
  3. 3)

    Academic Search Premier

     
  4. 4)

    Proquest Research Library

     
  5. 5)

    JSTOR

     
  6. 6)

    LexisNexis Academic

     
  7. 7)
     
  8. 8)

    Philosopher’s Index

     
  9. 9)

    Embase

     
  10. 10)
     
  11. 11)

    Web of Knowledge/Web of Science (WoS)

     
  12. 12)

    Digital Public Library of America (DPLA) (https://dp.la/)

     
  13. 13)

    Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) (https://doaj.org/)

     
  14. 14)

    Hathi Trust Digital Library (https://www.hathitrust.org/)

     
  15. 15)
     
  16. 16)

    Internet Archive (https://archive.org/ )

     
  17. 17)

    Globethics.net (http://www.globethics.net/)

     
  18. 18)
     
  19. 19)

    Law and Neuroscience Bibliography (http://www.lawneuro.org/bibliography.php)

     
Open access bioethics journals not contained in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) were individually accessed and searched; these included:
  1. 1)

    Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy from the University of Southern California (http://www.jesp.org/)

     
  2. 2)

    Journal of Mental Health Ethics from McMaster University (http://www.jemh.ca/)

     
  3. 3)

    Journal of Practical Ethics (http://www.jpe.ox.ac.uk/) from the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics at the University of Oxford; and

     
  4. 4)

    Philosophers’ Imprint from the University of Michigan (http://www.philosophersimprint.org/).

     

Results

The following bibliographies provide listings of 1137 articles, 56 books, and 134 book chapters published from 2002 through 2014 that focus on the ethical issues involved in translating neuroscientific research to clinical practice.

Research general issues:
  • Abi-Rached JM: The implications of the new brain sciences. The 'Decade of the Brain' is over but its effects are now becoming visible as neuropolitics and neuroethics, and in the emergence of neuroeconomies. EMBO Rep 2008, 9(12):1158-1162. doi: 10.1038/embor.2008.211.

  • Alpert S: Total information awareness—forgotten but not gone: lessons for neuroethics. Am J Bioeth 2007, 7(5): 24-26.

  • Anderson JA, Eijkholt M, Illes J: Neuroethical issues in clinical neuroscience research. Handb Clin Neurol 2013, 118: 335-343. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53501-6.00028-7.

  • Bergareche AM, da Rocha AC: Autonomy beyond the brain: what neuroscience offers to a more interactive, relational bioethics. AJOB Neurosci 2011, 2(3): 54-56. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2011.584948.

  • Bird S: Potential for bias in the context of neuroethics: commentary on “Neuroscience, neuropolitics and neuroethics: the complex case of crime, deception and FMRI”. Sci Eng Ethics 2012, 18(3): 593-600. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9399-y.

  • Blakemore C et al.: Implementing the 3Rs in neuroscience research: a reasoned approach. Neuron 2012, 75(6):948-950. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.09.001.

  • Brosnan C, Cribb A, Wainwright SP, Williams C: Neuroscientists’ everyday experiences of ethics: the interplay of regulatory, professional, personal and tangible ethical spheres. Sociol Health Illn 2013, 35(8): 1133-1148. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12026.

  • Caulfield T, Ogbogu U: Biomedical research and the commercialization agenda: a review of main considerations for neuroscience. Account Res 2008, 15(4): 303-320. doi: 10.1080/08989620802388788.

  • Chatterjee A: The ethics of neuroenhancement. Handb Clin Neurol 2013, 118: 323-34. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53501-6.00027-5.

  • Cheshire WP: Neuroscience, nuance, and neuroethics. Ethics Med 2006, 22(2): 71-3.

  • Cheung EH: A new ethics of psychiatry: neuroethics, neuroscience, and technology. J Psychiatr Pract 2009, 15(5): 391-401. doi: 10.1097/01.pra.0000361279.11210.14.

  • Choudhury S, Nagel SK, Slaby J: Critical neuroscience: linking neuroscience and society through critical practice. Biosocieties 2009, 4:61-77. doi:10.1017/S1745855209006437.

  • Cohen PD et al.: Ethical issues in clinical neuroscience research: a patient’s perspective. Neurotherapeutics 2007, 4(3): 537-544. doi: 10.1016/j.nurt.2007.04.008.

  • Crozier S: [Neuroethics: ethical issues in neurosciences]. Rev Prat 2013, 63(5): 666-669.

  • Decker M, Fleischer T: Contacting the brain—aspects of a technology assessment of neural implants. Biotechnol J 2008, 3(12): 1502-1510. doi: 10.1002/biot.200800225.

  • Di Luca M et al.: Consensus document on European brain research. Eur J Neurosci 2011, 33(5):768-818. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2010.07596.x.

  • Eaton ML, Illes J: Commercializing cognitive neurotechnology--the ethical terrain. Nat Biotechnol 2007, 25(4): 393-397. doi:10.1038/nbt0407-393.

  • Farah MJ: Neuroethics: the practical and the philosophical. Trends Cogn Sci 2005, 9(1): 34-40. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.00.

  • Farah MJ: Social, legal, and ethical implications of cognitive neuroscience: “neuroethics” for short. J Cogn Neurosci 2007, 19(3): 363-4. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.3.363.

  • Fellows LK, Stark M, Berg A, Chatterjee A: Patient registries in cognitive neuroscience research: advantages, challenges, and practical advice. J Cogn Neurosci 2008, 20(6): 1107-1113. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20065.

  • Fins JJ: From psychosurgery to neuromodulation and palliation: history’s lessons for the ethical conduct and regulation of neuropsychiatricresearch. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2003, 14(2): 303-19. doi: 10.1016/S1042-3680(02)00118-3.

  • Fischer MMJ: The BAC [bioethics advisory committee] consultation on neuroscience and ethics: an anthropologist’s perspective. Innovation 2013, 11(2): 3-5.

  • Ford PJ: Special section on clinical neuroethics consultation: introduction. HEC Forum 2008, 20(3): 311-4. doi: 10.1007/s10730-008-9081-6.

  • Fry CL: A descriptive social neuroethics is needed to reveal lived identities. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(9): 16-7. doi: 10.1080/15265160903098580

  • Fuchs T: Ethical issues in neuroscience. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2006, 19(6): 600-607. doi: 10.1097/01.yco.0000245752.75879.26.

  • Fukushi T, Sakura O, Koizumi H: Ethical considerations of neuroscience research: the perspectives on neuroethics in Japan. Neurosci Res 2007, 57(1): 10-16. doi: 10.1016/j.neures.2006.09.004.

  • Fukushi T, Sakura O: Exploring the origin of neuroethics: from the viewpoints of expression and concepts. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(1): 56-57. doi: 10.1080/15265160701839672.

  • Fukushi T, Sakura O: [Introduction of neuroethics: out of clinic, beyond academia in human brain research]. Rinsho Shinkeigaku 2008, 48(11): 952-954. doi: 10.5692/clinicalneurol.48.952.

  • Galpern WR et al.: Sham neurosurgical procedures in clinical trials for neurodegenerative diseases: scientific and ethical considerations. Lancet Neurol 2012, 11(7): 643-650. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70064-9.

  • Glannon W: Neuroethics. Bioethics 2006, 20(1): 37-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00474.x.

  • Gray JR, Thompson PM: Neurobiology of intelligence: science and ethics. Nat Rev Neurosci 2004, 5(6): 471-482. doi: 10.1038/nrn1405.

  • Gutiérrez G: Neurobiología y contenido material universal de la ética: reflexiones a partir del modelo neurobiológico de Antonio Damasio. Utop Prax Latinoam 2006, 11(33): 9-38.

  • Hauser SL: What ethics integration looks like in neuroscience research. Ann Neurol 2014, 75(5): 623-624. doi: 10.1002/ana.24177.

  • Henry S, Plemmons D: Neuroscience, neuropolitics and neuroethics: the complex case of crime, deception and FMRI. Sci Eng Ethics 2012, 18(3): 573-591. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9393-4.

  • Illes J: Empirical neuroethics: can brain imaging visualize human thought? why is neuroethics interested in such a possibility? EMBO Rep 2007, 8: S57-S60. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7401007.

  • Illes J: Empowering brain science with neuroethics. Lancet 2010, 376(9749): 1294-1295. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61904-6.

  • Illes J et al.: International perspectives on engaging the public in neuroethics. Nat Rev Neurosci 2005, 6(12): 977-982. doi:10.1038/nrn1808.

  • Illes J, Raffin TA: Neuroethics: an emerging new discipline in the study of brain and cognition. Brain Cogn 2002, 50(3): 341-344. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2626(02)00522-5.

  • Illes J, Bird SJ: Neuroethics: a modern context for ethics in neuroscience. Trends Neurosci 2006, 29(9): 511-517. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2006.07.002.

  • Illes J et al.: Neurotalk: improving the communication of neuroscience research. Nat Rev Neurosci 2010, 11(1): 61-69. doi: 10.1038/nrn2773.

  • Illes J et al.: Reducing barriers to ethics in neuroscience. Front Hum Neurosci 2010, 4: 167. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2010.00167.

  • Jonsen AR: What it means to “map” the field of neuroethics. Cerebrum 2002, 4(3): 71-72.

  • Jox RJ, Schöne-Seifert B, Brukamp K: [Current controversies in neuroethics]. Nervenarzt 2013, 84(10):1163-1164. doi: 10.1007/s00115-013-3731-x.

  • Justo L, Erazun F: Neuroethics needs an international human rights deliberative frame. AJOB Neurosci 2010, 1(4): 17-18. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2010.515559.

  • Kirschenbaum SR: Patenting basic research: myths and realities. Nat Neurosci 2002, 5: Suppl 1025-1027. doi: 10.1038/nn932.

  • Klein E: Is there a need for clinical neuroskepticism? Neuroethics 2011, 4(3): 251-259. doi: 10.1007/s12152-010-9089-x

  • Kretzschmar H: Brain banking: opportunities, challenges and meaning for the future. Nat Rev Neurosci 2009, 10(1): 70-78. doi: 10.1038/nrn2535.

  • Labuzetta JN, Burnstein R, Pickard J: Ethical issues in consenting vulnerable patients for neuroscience research. J Psychopharmacol 2011, 25(2): 205-210. doi: 10.1177/0269881109349838.

  • Lanzilao E, Shook JR, Benedikter R, Giordano J: Advancing neuroscience on the 21st-century world stage: the need for and a proposed structure of an internationally relevant neuroethics. Ethics Biol Eng Med 2013, 4(3), 211-229. doi: 10.1615/EthicsBiologyEngMed.2014010710.

  • Leonardi M et al.: Pain, suffering and some ethical issues in neuroscience research. J Headache Pain 2004, 5(2): 162-164. doi: 10.1007/s10194-004-0088-3.

  • Leshner AI: Ethical issues in taking neuroscience research from bench to bedside. Cerebrum 2004, 6(4): 66-72.

  • Lieberman MD: Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes. Annu Rev Psychol 2007, 58: 259-289. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085654.

  • Lombera S, Illes J: The international dimensions of neuroethics. Dev World Bioeth 2009, 9(2):57-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2008.00235.x.

  • Mandel RJ, Burger C: Clinical trials in neurological disorders using AAV vectors: promises and challenges. Curr Opin Mol Ther 2004, 6(5):482-490.

  • Mauron A: [Neuroethics]. Rev Med Suisse 2006, 2(74): 1816.

  • Miller FG, Kaptchuk TJ: Deception of subjects in neuroscience: an ethical analysis. J Neurosci 2008, 28(19): 4841-4843. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1493-08.2008.

  • Morein-Zamir S, Sahakian BJ: Neuroethics and public engagement training needed for neuroscientists. Trends Cogn Sci 2010, 14(2): 49-51. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.10.007.

  • Northoff G: [Methodological deficits in neuroethics: do we need theoretical neuroethics?]. Nervenarzt 2013, 84(10):1196-1202. doi: 10.1007/s00115-013-3732-9.

  • Nutt DJ, King LA, Nichols DE: Effects of Schedule 1 drug laws on neuroscience research and treatment innovation. Nat Rev Neurosci 2013, 14(8): 577-585. doi: 10.1038/nrn3530.

  • Olesen J: Consensus document on European brain research. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006, 77 (Supp 1):i1-i49.

  • Parens E, Johnston J: Does is make any sense to speak of neuroethics: three problems with keying ethics to hot new science and technology. EMBO Rep 2007, 8: S61-S64. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400992.

  • Parker LS, Kienholz ML: Disclosure issues in neuroscience research. Account Res 2008, 15(4): 226-241. doi: 10.1080/08989620802388697.

  • Paylor B, Longstaff H, Rossi F, Illes J: Collision or convergence: beliefs and politics in neuroscience discovery, ethics, and intervention. Trends Neurosci 2014, 37(8): 409-412. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2014.06.001.

  • Perrachione TK, Perrachione JR: Brains and brands: developing mutually informative research in neuroscience and marketing. J Consumer Behav 2008, 7: 303-318. doi: 10.1002/cb.253.

  • Pfaff DW, Kavaliers M, Choleris E: Response to Peer Commentaries on Mechanisms Underlying an Ability to Behave Ethically—Neuroscience Addresses Ethical Behaviors: Transitioning From Philosophical Dialogues to Testable Scientific Theories of Brain and Behavior. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(5): W1-W3. doi: 10.1080/15265160802180117.

  • Pickersgill M: Ordering disorder: knowledge production and uncertainty in neuroscience research. Sci Cult (Lond) 2011, 20(1): 71-87. doi: 10.1080/09505431.2010.508086.

  • Pierce R: What a tangled web we weave: ethical and legal implications of deception in recruitment. Account Res 2008, 15(4): 262-282. doi: 10.1080/08989620802388713.

  • Racine E, Waldman S, Rosenberg J, Illes J: Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Soc Sci Med 2010, 71(4): 725-733. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.05.017.

  • Racine E: Identifying challenges and conditions for the use of neuroscience in bioethics. Am J Bioeth 2007, 7(1): 74-76. doi: 10.1080/15265160601064363.

  • Racine E, Illes J: Responsabilités neuroéthiques/neuroethical responsibilities. Can J Neurol Sci 2006, 33(3): 260-268, 269-277. doi: 10.1017/S0317167100005126.

  • Ramos-Zúñiga R: [Neuroethics as a new epistemological perspective in neuroscience]. Rev Neurol 2014, 58(4): 145-146.

  • Robillard JM et al.: Untapped ethical resources for neurodegeneration research. BMC Med Ethics 2011, 12: 9. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-12-9.

  • Rose N: The human brain project: social and ethical challenges. Neuron 2014, 82(6):1212-1215. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.06.001.

  • Rose N: The human sciences in a biological age. Theory Cult Soc 2013, 30(1): 3-34. doi: 10.1177/0263276412456569.

  • Roskies A: Neuroethics for the new millenium. Neuron 2002, 35(1): 21-23. doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00763-8.

  • Schreiber D: On social attribution: implications of recent cognitive neuroscience research for race, law, and politics. Sci Eng Ethics 2012, 18(3): 557-566. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9381-8.

  • Shook JR, Giordano J: A principled and cosmopolitan neuroethics: considerations for international relevance. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2014, 9:1. doi: 10.1186/1747-5341-9-1.

  • Stevenson S et al.: Neuroethics, confidentiality, and a cultural imperative in early onset Alzheimer’s disease: a case study with a First Nation population. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2013, 8: 15. doi: 10.1186/1747-5341-8-15.

  • Synofzik M: Interventionen zwischen gehirn und geist: eine ethische analyse der neuen moglichkeiten der neurowissenschaften [Intervening between brain and mind: an ethical analysis of the new possibilities of the neurosciences]. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 2005, 73(10):596-604. doi:10.1055/s-2004-830292.

  • Swift TL: Sham surgery trial controls: perspectives of patients and their relatives. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2012, 7(3): 15-28. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.15.

  • Weisberg DS et al.: The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. J Cogn Neurosci 2008, 20(3): 470-477. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20040.

  • Winslade W: Severe brain injury: recognizing the limits of treatment and exploring the frontiers of research. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(2): 161-168. doi: 10.1017/S0963180107070181.

  • Wolpe PR: Ethics and social policy in research on the neuroscience of human sexuality. Nature Neuroscience 2004, 7(10): 1031-1033. 10.1038/nn1324.

  • Zimmerman E, Racine E: Ethical issues in the translation of social neuroscience: a policy analysis of current guidelines for public dialogue in human research. Account Res 2012, 19(1): 27-46. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2012.650949.

Books:
  • Ackerman S: Hard Science, Hard Choices: Facts, Ethics, and Policies Guiding Brain Science Today. New York: Dana Press; 2006.

  • Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Understanding the Brain: The Birth of a Learning Science. Paris: OECD; 2007.

  • Harrington M: The Design of Experiments in Neuroscience. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2011.

  • National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Military and Intelligence Methodology for Emergent Neurophysiological and Cognitive/Neural Science Research in the Next Two Decades. Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2008.

  • Sousa DA: Brainwork: The Neuroscience Behind How We Lead Others. Bloomington, IN: Triple Nickel Press; 2012.

  • Taylor KE: The Brain Supremacy: Notes from the Frontiers of Neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

Book chapters:
  • Alves WM: Ethical considerations in neuroemergency clinical trials. In Handbook of Neuroemergency Clinical Trials. Edited by Wayne M. Alves. Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press; 2006: 257-273.

  • Anderson JA, Eijkholt M, Illes J: Neuroethical issues in clinical neuroscience research. In Ethical and Legal Issues in Neurology. Edited by James L. Bernat, H. Richard Beresford. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2013: 335-344.

  • Birge S: Brainhood, selfhood, or “meat with a point of view”: the value of fiction for neuroscientific research and neurological medicine. In Neuroscientific Turn: Transdisciplinarity in the Age of the Brain. Edited by Melissa M. Littlefield, Jenell M. Johnson. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 2012: 89-104.

  • Borck C: Toys are us: models and metaphors in brain research. In Critical Neuroscience: A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience. Edited by Suparna Choudhury, Jan Slaby. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012: 113-134.

  • Detre J, Bockow TB: Incidental findings in magnetic resonance imaging research. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012: 120-127.

  • Ford PJ, Deshpande A: The ethics of surgically invasive neuroscience research. In Ethical and Legal Issues in Neurology. Edited by James L. Bernat, H. Richard Beresford. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2013: 315-322.

  • Giordano J: Integrative convergence in neuroscience: trajectories, problems and the need for a progressive neurobioethics. In Technological Innovations in Sensing and Detection of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear Threats and Ecological Terrorism. Edited by A. Vaseashta, Eric Braman, Philip Susmann. Dordrecht: Springer; 2012: 115-130.

  • Giordano J, Waters P: What might renewed focus on brain research mean for the prevention and care of brain injury and its effects? In their Brain Injury: Spectrum Effects and Implications. Edited by James Giordano and Patrick Waters. Arlington, VA: Potomac Institute Press; 2013: xiii-xxiv.

  • Hochberg L, Cochrane T: Implanted neural interfaces: ethics in treatment and research. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012: 234-250.

  • Hurst S: Clinical research on conditions affecting cognitive capacity. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 513-528.

  • Kim SYH: Competence for informed consent for treatment and research. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012: 83-95.

  • Linden D: The ethics and politics of brain control. In his Brain Control: Developments in Therapy and Implications for Society. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2014: 131-171.

  • Miller FG, Fins JJ: Protecting human subjects in brain research: a pragmatic perspective. In Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice, and Policy. Edited by Judy Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006: 123-140.

  • Murray S, Yanagi MA: Transitioning brain research: from bench to battlefield. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014 [2015]:11-22.

  • Racine E: Public understanding of neuroscience innovation and emerging interpretations of neuroscience research. In his Pragmatic Neuroethics: Improving Treatment and Understanding of the Mind-Brain. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2010: 97-120.

  • Wolf SM: Incidental findings in neuroscience research: a fundamental challenge to the structure of bioethics and health law. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 623-634.

Neuroimaging:
  • Aggarwal NK: Neuroimaging, culture, and forensic psychiatry. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009, 37(2): 239-244.

  • Aktunç E.: Tackling Duhemian problems: an alternative to skepticism of neuroimaging in philosophy of cognitive science. Rev Philos Psychol 2014, 5(4): 449-464. doi: 10.1007/s13164-014-0186-3.

  • Al-Delaimy WK: Ethical concepts and future challenges of neuroimaging: an Islamic perspective. Sci Eng Ethics 2012, 18(3): 509-518. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9386-3.

  • Alpert S: The SPECTer of commercial neuroimaging. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 56-58. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721450.

  • Anderson JA, Illes J: Neuroimaging and mental health: drowning in a sea of acrimony. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 42-43. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721454.

  • Anderson J, Mizgalewicz A, Illes J: Reviews of functional MRI: the ethical dimensions of methodological critique. PLoS ONE 2012, 7(8): e42836. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042836.

  • Anderson JA, Mizgalewicz A, Illes J: Triangulating perspectives on functional neuroimaging for disorders of mental health. BMC Psychiatry 2013, 13: 208. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-13-208.

  • Annas G: Foreword: imagining a new era of neuroimaging, neuroethics, and neurolaw. Am J Law Med 2007, 33(2-3): 163-170. doi:10.1177/009885880703300201.

  • Bluhm R: New research, old problems: methodological and ethical issues in fMRI research examining sex/gender differences in emotion processing. Neuroethics 2013, 6(2): 319-330. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9143-3.

  • Borgelt EL, Buchman DZ, Illes J: Neuroimaging in mental health care: voices in translation. Front Hum Neurosci 2012, 6: 293. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00293.

  • Borgelt E, Buchman DZ, Illes J: “This Is why you’ve been suffering”: reflections of providers on neuroimaging in mental health care. J Bioeth Inq 2011, 8(1): 15-25. doi: 10.1007/s11673-010-9271-1.

  • Boyce AC: Neuroimaging in psychiatry: evaluating the ethical consequences for patient care. Bioethics 2009, 23(6): 349-359. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01724.x. 

  • Brakewood B, Poldrack RA: The ethics of secondary data analysis: considering the application of Belmont principles to the sharing of neuroimaging data. Neuroimage 2013, 82: 671-676. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.040.

  • Brindley T, Giordano J: Neuroimaging: correlation, validity, value, and admissibility: Daubert—and reliability—revisited. AJOB Neurosci 2014, 5(2): 48-50. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2014.884186.

  • Canli T, Amin Z: Neuroimaging of emotion and personality: scientific evidence and ethical considerations. Brain Cogn 2002, 50(3): 414-431. doi:10.1016/S0278-2626(02)00517-1.

  • Cheshire WP: Can grey voxels resolve neuroethical dilemmas? Ethics Med 2007, 23(3): 135-140.

  • Coch D: Neuroimaging research with children: ethical issues and case scenarios. J Moral Educ 2007, 36(1): 1-18. doi: 10.1080/03057240601185430.

  • d’Abrera JC et al.: A neuroimaging proof of principle study of Down’s syndrome and dementia: ethical and methodological challenges in intrusive research. J Intellect Disabil Res 2013, 57(2): 105-118. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01495.x.

  • de Champlain J, Patenaude J: Review of a mock research protocol in functional neuroimaging by Canadian research ethics boards. J Med Ethics 2006, 32(9): 530-534. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.012807.

  • Deslauriers C et al.: Perspectives of Canadian researchers on ethics review of neuroimaging research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2010, 5(1): 49-66. doi: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.1.49.

  • Di Pietro NC, Illes J: Disclosing incidental findings in brain research: the rights of minors in decision-making. J Magn Reason Imaging 2013, 38(5): 1009-1013. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24230.

  • Downie J, Hadskis M: Finding the right compass for issue-mapping in neuroimaging. Am J Bioeth 2005, 5(2): 27-29. doi: 10.1080/15265160590960285.

  • Downie J et al.: Paediatric MRI research ethics: the priority issues. J Bioeth Inq 2007, 4(2): 85-91. doi: 10.1007/s11673-007-9046-5.

  • Downie J, Marshall J: Pediatric neuroimaging ethics . Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(2): 147-160. doi: 10.1017/S096318010707017X 

  • Eaton ML, Illes J: Commercializing cognitive neurotechnology – the ethical terrain. Nat Biotechnol 2007, 25(4): 393-397. doi: 10.1038/nbt0407-393.

  • Evers K, Sigman M: Possibilities and limits of mind-reading: a neurophilosophical perspective. Conscious Cogn 2013, 22(3):887-897. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2013.05.011.

  • Farah MJ: Brain images, babies, and bathwater: critiquing critiques of functional neuroimaging. Hastings Cent Rep 2014, 44(S2): S19-S30. doi: 10.1002/hast.295.

  • Farah MJ et al.: Brain imaging and brain privacy: a realistic concern? J Cogn Neurosci 2009, 21(1): 119-127. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21010.

  • Farah MJ, Wolpe PR: Monitoring and manipulating brain function: new neuroscience technologies and their ethical implications. Hastings Cent Rep 2004, 34(3): 35-45. doi: 10.2307/3528418.

  • Farah MJ, Gillihan SJ: The puzzle of neuroimaging and psychiatric diagnosis: technology and nosology in an evolving discipline. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 31-41. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.713072.

  • Farah MJ, Hook CJ: The seductive allure of “seductive allure”. Perspect Psychol Sci 2013, 8(1): 88-90. doi: 10.1177/1745691612469035.

  • Fine C: Is there neurosexism in functional neuroimaging investigations of sex differences? Neuroethics 2013, 6(2): 369-409. doi: 10.1007/s12152-012-9169-1.

  • Fins JJ: The ethics of measuring and modulating consciousness: the imperative of minding time. Prog Brain Res 2009, 177: 371-382. doi: 10.1016/S0079-6123(09)17726-9.

  • Fins JJ, Illes J: Lights, camera, inaction? neuroimaging and disorders of consciousness. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(9): W1-W3. doi: 10.1080/15265160802479568.

  • Fins JJ: Neuroethics and neuroimaging: moving towards transparency. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(9): 46-52. doi: 10.1080/15265160802334490.

  • Fins JJ: Neuroethics, neuroimaging, and disorders of consciousness: promise or peril? Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 2011, 122: 336-346.

  • Fins JJ et al.: Neuroimaging and disorders of consciousness: envisioning an ethical research agenda. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(9): 3-12. doi: 10.1080/15265160802318113.

  • Fins JJ, Shapiro ZE: Neuroimaging and neuroethics: clinical and policy considerations. Curr Opin Neurol 2007, 20(6): 650-654. doi: 10.1097/WCO.0b013e3282f11f6d.

  • Fins JJ: Rethinking disorders of consciousness: new research and its implications. Hastings Cent Rep 2005, 35(2): 22-24. doi: 10.1353/hcr.2005.0020.

  • Fisher CE: Neuroimaging and validity in psychiatric diagnosis. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 50-51. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721471.

  • Fisher DB, Truog RD: Conscientious of the conscious: interactive capacity as a threshold marker for consciousness. AJOB Neurosci 2013, 4(4): 26-33. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.819391.

  • Fitsch H: (A)e(s)th(et)ics of brain imaging: visibilities and sayabilities in functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroethics 2012, 5(3): 275-283. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9139-z.

  • Friedrich O: Knowledge of partial awareness in disorders of consciousness: implications for ethical evaluations? Neuroethics 2013, 6(1): 13-23. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9145-1.

  • Garnett A, Lee G, Illes J: Publication trends in neuroimaging of minimally conscious states. PeerJ 2013 1:e155. doi: 10.7717/peerj.155.

  • Gauthier S, Leuzy A, Racine E, Rosa-Neto P: Diagnosis and management of Alzheimer’s disease: past, present and future ethical issues. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110: 102-113. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.01.003.

  • Giordano J: Neuroimaging in psychiatry: approaching the puzzle as a piece of the bigger picture(s). AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 54-56. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721469.

  • Giordano J, DuRousseau D: Toward right and good use of brain-machine interfacing neurotechnologies: ethical issues and implications for guidelines and policy. Cog Tech 2010, 15(2): 5-10.

  • Gjoneska B: Neuroimaging and neuroethics: imaging the ethics of neuroscience. Prilozi 2012, 33(1): 419-424.

  • Gruber D, Dickerson JA: Persuasive images in popular science: testing judgments of scientific reasoning and credibility. Public Underst Sci 2012, 21(8): 938-948. doi: 10.1177/0963662512454072.

  • Hadskis M et al.: The therapeutic misconception: a threat to valid parental consent for pediatric neuroimaging research. Account Res 2008, 15(3): 133-151. doi: 10.1080/08989620801946917.

  • Heinemann T et al.: Incidental findings in neuroimaging: ethical problems and solutions. Dtsch Arztebl 2007, 104(27): A-1982-1987.

  • Heinrichs B: A new challenge for research ethics: incidental findings in neuroimaging. J Bioeth Inq 2011, 8(1): 59-65. doi: 10.1007/s11673-010-9268-9.

  • Hinton VJ: Ethics of neuroimaging in pediatric development. Brain Cogn 2002, 50(3): 455-468. doi:10.1016/S0278-2626(02)00521-3.

  • Hook CJ, Farah MJ: Look again: effects of brain images and mind-brain dualism on lay evaluations of research. J Cogn Neurosci 2013, 25(9): 1397-1405. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00407.

  • Huber CG, Huber J: Epistemological considerations on neuroimaging—a crucial prerequisite for neuroethics. Bioethics 2009, 23(6): 340-348. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01728.x.

  • Huber CG, Kummer C, Huber J: Imaging and imagining: current positions on the epistemic priority of theoretical concepts and data psychiatric neuroimaging. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2008, 21(6): 625-629. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e328314b7a1.

  • Ikeda K et al.: Neuroscientific information bias in metacomprehension: the effect of brain images on metacomprehension judgment of neuroscience research Psychon Bull Rev 2013, 20(6): 1357-1363. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0457-5.

  • Illes J et al.: Discovery and disclosure of incidental findings in neuroimaging research. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004, 20(5): 743-747. doi: 10.1002/jmri.20180.

  • Illes J et al.: Ethical consideration of incidental findings on adult brain MRI in research. Neurology 2004, 62(6): 888-890. doi: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000118531.90418.89.

  • Illes J, Kirschen MP, Gabrieli JD: From neuroimaging to neuroethics. Nat Neurosci 2003, 6(3): 205. doi: 10.1038/nn0303.205.

  • Illes J, Racine E: Imaging or imagining? a neuroethics challenge informed by genetics. Am J Bioeth 2005, 5(2): 5-18. doi: 10.1080/15265160590923358.

  • Illes J, Lombera S, Rosenberg J, Arnow B: In the mind’s eye: provider and patient attitudes on functional brain imaging. J Psychiatr Res 2008, 43(2): 107-114. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2008.02.008.

  • Illes J: Neuroethics in a new era of neuroimaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003, 24(9): 1739-1741.

  • Illes J, Kirschen M: New prospects and ethical challenges for neuroimaging within and outside the health care system. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003, 24(10): 1932-1934.

  • Illes J, Rosen A, Greicius M, Racine E: Prospects for prediction: ethics analysis of neuroimaging in Alzheimer’s disease. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007, 1097: 278-295. doi: 10.1196/annals.1379.030.

  • Intriago AR: Neuroimaging and causal responsibility. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 60-62. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721463.

  • Jox RJ: Interface cannot replace interlocution: why the reductionist concept of neuroimaging-based capacity determination fails. AJOB Neurosci 2013, 4(4): 15-17. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.827279.

  • Kabraji S, Naylor E, Wood D: Reading minds? ethical implications of recent advances in neuroimaging. Penn Bioeth J 2008, 4(2): 9-11.

  • Kahane G: Brain imaging and the inner life. Lancet 2008, 371(9624): 1572-1573. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60679-0.

  • Kaposy C: Ethical muscle and scientific interests: a role for philosophy in scientific research. Q Rev Biol 2008, 83(1): 77-86. doi: 10.1086/529565.

  • Keehner M, Mayberry L, Fischer MH: Different clues from different views: the role of image format in public perceptions of neuroimaging results. Psychon Bull Rev 2011, 18(2): 422-428. doi: 10.3758/s13423-010-0048-7.

  • Kehagia AA et al.: More education, less administration: reflections of neuroimagers’ attitudes to ethics through the qualitative looking glass. Sci Eng Ethics 2012, 18(4): 775-788. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9282-2.

  • Kirschen MP, Jaworska A, Illes J: Subjects’ expectations in neuroimaging research. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006, 23(2): 205-209. doi: 10.1002/jmri.20499.

  • Klein DA, Russell M: Include objective quality-of-life assessments when making treatment decisions with patients possessing covert awareness. AJOB Neurosci 2013, 4(4): 19-21. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.827277.

  • Kulynych J: Legal and ethical issues in neuroimaging research: human subjects protection, medical privacy, and the public communication of research results. Brain Cogn 2002, 50(3): 345-357. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2626(02)00518-3.

  • Kumra S et al.: Ethical and practical considerations in the management of incidental findings in pediatric MRI studies. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2006, 45(8): 1000-1006. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000222786.49477.a8.

  • Lee N, Chamberlain L: Neuroimaging and psychophysiological measurement in organizational research: an agenda for research in organizational cognitive neuroscience. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007, 1118: 18-42. doi: 10.1196/annals.1412.003.

  • Leung L: Incidental findings in neuroimaging: ethical and medicolegal considerations. Neurosci J 2013, 439145: 1-7. doi:10.1155/2013/439145.

  • Lifshitz M, Margulies DS, Raz A: Lengthy and expensive? why the future of diagnostic neuroimaging may be faster, cheaper, and more collaborative than we think. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 48-50. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721466.

  • Linden DE: The challenges and promise of neuroimaging in psychiatry. Neuron 2012, 73(1): 8-22. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.12.014.

  • McCabe DP, Castel AD: Seeing is believing: the effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning. Cognition 2008, 107(1): 343-352. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.017.

  • Meegan DV: Neuroimaging techniques for memory detection: scientific, ethical, and legal issues. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(1): 9-20. doi: 10.1080/15265160701842007.

  • Metlzer CC et al.: Guidelines for the ethical use of neuroimages in medical testimony: report of a multidisciplinary consensus conference. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014, 35(4): 632-637. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3711.

  • Moosa E: Translating neuroethics: reflections from Muslim ethics: commentary on “ethical concepts and future challenges of neuroimaging: an Islamic perspective”. Sci Eng Ethics 2012, 18(3): 519-528. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9392-5.

  • Morgan A: Representations gone mental. Synthese 2014, 191(2): 213-244. doi: 10.1007/s11229-013-0328-7.

  • O’Connell G et al.: The brain, the science and the media: the legal, corporate, social and security implications of neuroimaging and the impact of media coverage. EMBO Rep 2011, 12(7): 630-636. doi: 10.1038/embor.2011.115.

  • Parens E, Johnston J: Does it make sense to speak of neuroethics? three problems with keying ethics to hot new science and technology. EMBO Rep 2007, 8:S61-S64. doi: 10.1038/si.embor.7400992.

  • Parens E, Johnston J: Neuroimaging: beginning to appreciate its complexities. Hastings Cent Rep 2014, 44(2): S2-S7. doi: 10.1002/hast.293.

  • Peterson A et al.: Assessing decision-making capacity in the behaviorally nonresponsive patient with residual covert awareness. AJOB Neurosci 2013, 4(4): 3-14. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.821189.

  • Pixten W, Nys H, Dierickx K: Ethical and regulatory issues in pediatric research supporting the non-clinical application of fMR imaging. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(1): 21-23. doi: 10.1080/15265160802627018.

  • Poldrack RA, Gorgolewski KJ: Making big data open: data sharing in neuroimaging. Nat Neurosci 2014, 17(11): 1510-1517. doi: 10.1038/nn.3818.

  • Racine E et al.: A Canadian perspective on ethics review and neuroimaging: tensions and solutions. Can J Neurol Sci 2011, 38(4): 572-579. doi: 10.1017/S0317167100012117.

  • Racine E, Illes J: Emerging ethical challenges in advanced neuroimaging research: review, recommendations and research agenda. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2007, 2(2): 1-10. doi: 10.1525/jer.2007.2.2.1.

  • Racine E, Bar-llan O, Illes J: fMRI in the public eye . Nat Rev Neurosci 2005, 6(2): 159-164. doi: 10.1038/nrn1609.

  • Racine E, Bar-llan O, Illes J: Brain imaging – a decade of coverage in the print media. Sci Commun 2006, 28(1): 122-143. doi: 10.1177/1075547006291990.

  • Ramos RT: The conceptual limits of neuroimaging in psychiatric diagnosis. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 52-53. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721856.

  • Robert JS: Gene maps, brain scans, and psychiatric nosology. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(2): 209-218. doi: 10.1017/S0963180107070223.

  • Rodrique C, Riopelle RJ, Bernat J, Racine E: Perspectives and experience of healthcare professionals on diagnosis, prognosis, and end-of-life decision making in patients with disorders of consciousness. Neuroethics 2013, 6(1): 25-36. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9142-4.

  • Roskies AL: Neuroimaging and inferential distance. Neuroethics 2008, 1(1): 19-30. doi: 10.1007/s12152-007-9003-3.

  • Rusconi E, Mitchener-Nissen T: The role of expectations, hype and ethics in neuroimaging and neuromodulation futures. Front Syst Neurosci 2014, 8: 214. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00214.

  • Sample M: Evolutionary, not revolutionary: current prospects for diagnostic neuroimaging. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4): 46-48. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721461.

  • Samuel G: “Popular demand”—constructing an imperative for fMRI. AJOB Neurosci 2013, 4(4): 17-18. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.827280.

  • Scott NA, Murphy TH, Illes J: Incidental findings in neuroimaging research: a framework for anticipating the next frontier. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2012, 7(1): 53-57. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.1.53.

  • Seixas D, Basto MA: Ethics in fMRI studies: a review of the EMBASE and MEDLINE literature. Clin Neuroradiol 2008, 18(2): 79-87. doi: 10.1007/s00062-008-8009-5.

  • Shaw RL et al.: Ethical issues in neuroimaging health research: an IPA study with research participants. J Health Psychol 2008, 13(8): 1051-1059. doi: 10.1177/1359105308097970.

  • Stevenson DK, Goldworth A: Ethical considerations in neuroimaging and its impact on decision-making for neonates. Brain Cogn 2002, 50(3): 449-454. doi:10.1016/S0278-2626(02)00523-7.

  • Synofzik M: Was passiert im Gehirn meines Patienten? Neuroimaging und Neurogenetik als ethische Herausforderungen in der Medizin. [What happens in the brain of my patients? neuroimaging and neurogenetics as ethical challenges in medicine.] Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007, 132(49), 2646-2649. doi:10.1055/s-2007-993114.

  • Turner DC, Sahakian BJ: Ethical questions in functional neuroimaging and cognitive enhancement. Poiesis Prax 2006, 4:81-94. doi: 10.1007/s10202-005-0020-1.

  • van Hooff JC: Neuroimaging techniques for memory detection: scientific, ethical, and legal issues. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(1): 25-26. doi: 10.1080/15265160701828501.

  • Valerio J, Illes J: Ethical implications of neuroimaging in sports concussion. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2012, 27(3): 216-221. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0b013e3182229b6c.

  • Vincent NA: Neuroimaging and responsibility assessments. Neuroethics 2011, 4(1): 35-49. doi: 10.1007/s12152-008-9030-8.

  • Wardlaw JM: “Can it read my mind?” – what do the public and experts think of the current (mis)uses of neuroimaging? PLoS One 2011, 6(10): e25829. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025829.

  • Wasserman D, Johnston J: Seeing responsibility: can neuroimaging teach us anything about moral and legal responsibility? Hastings Cent Rep 2014, 44 (s2): S37-S49. doi:10.1002/hast.297.

  • Weijer C et al.: Ethics of neuroimaging after serious brain injury. BMC Med Ethics 2014, 15:41. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-41.

  • White T et al.: Pediatric population-based neuroimaging and the Generation R study: the intersection of developmental neuroscience and epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol 2013, 28(1): 99-111. doi: 10.1007/s10654-013-9768-0.

  • Whiteley L: Resisting the revelatory scanner? critical engagements with fMRI in popular media. Biosocieties 2012, 7(3): 245-272. doi: 10.1057/biosoc.2012.21.

  • Wu KC: Soul-making in neuroimaging? Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(9): 21-22. doi: 10.1080/15265160802412536.

  • Zarzeczny A, Caulfield T: Legal liability and research ethics boards: the case of neuroimaging and incidental findings. Int J Law Psychiatry 2012, 35(2): SI137-SI145. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2011.12.005.

Books:
  • Demertzi A: Ain’t No Rest for the Brain: Neuroimaging and Neuroethics in Dialogue for Patients with Disorders of Consciousness. Saarbr̈ucken, Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing; 2012.

  • Dumit J: Picturing Personhood: Brain Scans and Biomedical Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2004.

  • Joyce KA: Magnetic Appeal: MRI and the Myth of Transparency. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 2008.

  • Lanzerath D, Rietschel M, Heinrichs B, Schmäl C, Baldwin T: Incidental Findings: Scientific, Legal and Ethical Issues. Köln : Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2014.

  • Richmond S, Rees G, Edwards SJL: I Know What You’re Thinking: Brain Imaging and Mental Privacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

Book Chapters:
  • Arentshorst ME, Broerse JEW, Roelofsen A, de Cock Buning T: Towards responsible neuroimaging applications in health care: guiding visions of scientists and technology developers. In Responsible Innovation 1: Innovative Solutions for Global Issues. Edited by Jeroen van den Hoven. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014: 255-280.

  • Canli T, Amin Z: Neuroimaging of emotion and personality: ethical considerations. In Neuroethics: An Introduction with Readings. Edited by Martha J. Farah. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2010:147-154.

  • Canli T: When genes and brains unite: ethical implications of genomic neuroimaging. In Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice and Policy. Edited by Judith Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006: 169-184.

  • Farrah MJ, Gillihan SJ: Neuroimaging in clinical psychiatry. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013: 128-148.

  • Frederico C, Lombera S, Illes J: Intersecting complexities in neuroimaging and neuroethics. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 377-387.

  • Hadskis MR, Schmidt MH: Pediatric neuroimaging research. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:389-404.

  • Illes J et al.: Ethical and practical considerations in managing incidental findings in functional magnetic resonance imaging. In Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science: Essential Readings in Neuroethics. Edited by Walter Glannon. New York: Dana Press; 2007: 104-114.

  • Illes J, Racine E: Imaging or imagining? A neuroethics challenge informed by genetics. In Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science: Essential Readings in Neuroethics. Edited by Walter Glannon. New York: Dana Press; 2007: 140-162.

  • Illes J: Neuroethics in a new era of neuroimaging. In Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science: Essential Readings in Neuroethics. Edited by Walter Glannon. New York: Dana Press; 2007: 99-103.

  • Illes J, Rosen A, Greicius M, Racine E: Prospects for prediction: ethics analysis of neuroimaging in Alzheimer’s disease. In Imaging and the Aging Brain. Edited by Mony J. de Leon, Donald A. Snider, Howard Federoff. Boston: Blackwell; 2007: 278-295.

  • Kahlaoui K et al.: Neurobiological and neuroethical perspectives on the contribution of functional neuroimaging to the study of aging in the brain. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 495-512.

  • Karanasion IS, Biniaris CG, Marsh AJ: Ethical issues of brain functional imaging: reading your mind. In Medical and Care Compunetics 5. Edited by Lodewijk Bos. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2008: 310-320.

  • Koch T: Images of uncertainty: two cases of neuroimages and what they cannot show. In Neurotechnology: Premises, Potential, and Problems. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012: 47-57.

  • Kulynych J: Legal and ethical issues in neuroimaging research: human subjects protection, medical privacy, and the public communication of research results. In Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science: Essential Readings in Neuroethics. Edited by Walter Glannon. New York: Dana Press; 2007: 115-133.

  • Mamourian A: Incidental findings on research functional MR images: should we look? In Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science: Essential Readings in Neuroethics. Edited by Walter Glannon. New York: Dana Press; 2007: 134-139.

  • Owen AM: Functional magnetic resonance imaging, covert awareness, and brain injury. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:135-147.

  • Phelps EA, Thomas LA: Race, behavior, and the brain: the role of neuroimaging in understanding complex social behaviors. In Neuroethics: An Introduction with Readings. Edited by Martha J. Farah. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2010: 191-200.

  • Racine E, Bell E, Illes J: Can we read minds? ethical challenges and responsibilities in the use of neuroimaging research. In Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Edited by James J. Giordano, Bert Gordijn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010: 244-270.

  • Raschle N et al.: Pediatric neuroimaging in early childhood and infancy: challenges and practical guidelines. In The Neurosciences and Music IV: Learning and Memory. Edited by Katie Overy. Boston, Mass.: Blackwell; 2012: 43-50.

  • Toole C, Zarzeczny A, Caulfield T: Research ethics challenges in neuroimaging research: a Canadian perspective. In International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis. Edited by Tade Matthias Spranger. Berlin: Springer; 2012: 89-101.

  • Ulmer S et al.: Incidental findings in neuroimaging research: ethical considerations. In fMRI: Basics and Clinical Applications. Edited by Stephan Ulmer, Olav Jansen. Berlin: Springer; 2013: 311-318.

  • Vanmeter J: Neuroimaging: thinking in pictures. In Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Edited by James J. Giordano, Bert Gordijn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010: 230-243.

Neurogenetics:
  • Choosing deafness. Arch Dis Child 2003, 88(1):24.

  • Abreu Alves FR, Quintanilha Ribeiro Fde A: Diagnosis routine and approach in genetic sensorineural hearing loss. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2007, 73(3):412-417.

  • Alcalay RN et al.: Michael J. Fox Foundation LRRK2 Consortium: geographical differences in returning genetic research data to study participants. Genet Med 2014, 16(8):644-645. doi:10.1038/gim.2014.55.

  • Alonso ME et al.: Homozygosity in Huntington's disease: new ethical dilemma caused by molecular diagnosis. Clin Genet 2002, 61(6):437-442.

  • Anido A, Carlson LM, Sherman SL: Attitudes toward Fragile X mutation carrier testing from women identified in a general population survey. J Genet Couns 2007, 16(1):97-104. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9049-0.

  • Arnos KS: The implications of genetic testing for deafness. Ear Hear 2003, 24(4):324-331. doi:10.1097/01.AUD.0000079800.64741.CF.

  • Arnos KS: Ethical and social implications of genetic testing for communication disorders. J Commun Disord 2008, 41(5):444-457. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2008.03.001.

  • Asscher E, Koops BJ: The right not to know and preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington's disease. J Med Ethics 2010, 36(1):30-33. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.031047.

  • Avard DM, Knoppers BM: Ethical dimensions of genetics in pediatric neurology: a look into the future. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2002, 9(1):53-61.

  • Barrett SK, Drazin T, Rosa D, Kupchik GS: Genetic counseling for families of patients with Fragile X syndrome. JAMA 2004, 291(24): 2945. doi:10.1001/jama.291.24.2945-a.

  • Bassett SS, Havstad SL, Chase GA: The role of test accuracy in predicting acceptance of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease. Genet Test 2004, 8(2):120-126. doi:10.1089/1090657041797383.

  • Bechtel K, Geschwind MD: Ethics in prion disease. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110:29-44. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.07.001.

  • Blasé T et al.: Sharing GJB2/GJB6 genetic test information with family members. J Genet Couns 2007, 16(3):313-324. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9066-z.

  • Bombard Y et al.: Beyond the patient: the broader impact of genetic discrimination among individuals at risk of Huntington disease. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 2012, 159B(2):217-226. doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.32016.

  • Bombard Y et al.: Factors associated with experiences of genetic discrimination among individuals at risk for Huntington disease. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 2011, 156B(1):19-27. doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.31130.

  • Bombard Y et al.: Engagement with genetic discrimination: concerns and experiences in the context of Huntington disease. Eur J Hum Genet 2008, 16(3): 279-289. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201937.

  • Bombard Y, Semaka A, Hayden MR: Adoption and the communication of genetic risk: experiences in Huntington disease. Clin Genet 2012, 81(1), 64-69. doi:10.1111/j.1399-0004.2010.01614.x.

  • Borry P, Clarke A, Dierickx K: Look before you leap: carrier screening for type 1 Gaucher disease: difficult questions. Eur J Hum Genet 2008, 16(2)139-140. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201960.

  • Boudreault P et al.: Deaf adults' reasons for genetic testing depend on cultural affiliation: results from a prospective, longitudinal genetic counseling and testing study. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2010, 15(3):209-227. doi:10.1093/deafed/enq012.

  • Breakefield XO, Sena-Esteves M: Healing genes in the nervous system. Neuron 2010, 68(2):178-181. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.10.005.

  • Brief E, Illes J: Tangles of neurogenetics, neuroethics, and culture. Neuron 2010, 68(2):174-177. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.09.041.

  • Buchman DZ, Illes J: Imaging genetics for our neurogenetic future. Minn J L Sci & Tech 2010, 11(1):79-97.

  • Burton SK et al.: A focus group study of consumer attitudes toward genetic testing and newborn screening for deafness. Genet Med 2006, 8(12): 779-783. doi:10.109701.gim.0000250501.59830.ff.

  • Cabanillas Farpón R, Cadinanos Banales J: Hereditary hearing loss: Genetic counselling. [Hipoacusias hereditarias: asesoramiento genetico] Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2012, 63(3):218-229. doi:10.1016/j.otorri.2011.02.006.

  • Campbell E, Ross LF: Parental attitudes regarding newborn screening of PKU and DMD. Am J Med Genet A 2003, 120A(2):209-214. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.20031.

  • Camporesi S: Choosing deafness with preimplantation genetic diagnosis: an ethical way to carry on a cultural bloodline? Camb Q Healthc 2010, 19(1):86-96. doi:10.1017/S0963180109990272.

  • Caron L et al.: Nicotine addiction through a neurogenomic prism: ethics, public health, and smoking. Nicotine Tob Res 2005, 7(2): 181-197. doi:10.1080/14622200500055251.

  • Chen DT et al.: Impact of restricting enrollment in stroke genetics research to adults able to provide informed consent. Stroke 2008, 39(3):831-837. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.494518.

  • Chen DT et al.: Stroke genetic research and adults with impaired decision-making capacity: a survey of IRB and investigator practices. Stroke 2008, 39(10): 2732-2735. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.515130.

  • Chen DT et al.: The impact of privacy protections on recruitment in a multicenter stroke genetics study. Neurology 2005, 64(4): 721-724. doi: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000152042.07414.CC.

  • Cleary-Goldman J et al.: Screening for Down syndrome: practice patterns and knowledge of obstetricians and gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2006, 107(1): 11-17. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000190215.67096.90.

  • Corcia P: Methods of the announcement of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis diagnosis in familial forms. [Contenu et modalites de l'annonce du diagnostic de SLA dans un contexte familial]. Rev Neurol (Paris) 2006, 162 Spec No 2, 4S122-4S126. doi:MDOI-RN-06-2006-162-HS2-0035-3787-101019-200509367.

  • Czeisler CA: Medical and genetic differences in the adverse impact of sleep loss on performance: ethical considerations for the medical profession. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 2009, 120:249-285.

  • de Die-Smulders CE et al.: Reproductive options for prospective parents in families with Huntington's disease: clinical, psychological and ethical reflections. Hum Reprod Update 2013, 19(3):304-315. doi:10.1093/humupd/dms058.

  • de Luca D et al.: Heterologous assisted reproduction and kernicterus: the unlucky coincidence reveals an ethical dilemma. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2008, 21(4): 219-222. doi:10.1080/14767050801924811.

  • Decruyenaere M et al.: The complexity of reproductive decision-making in asymptomatic carriers of the Huntington mutation. Eur J Hum Genet 2007, 15(4): 453-462. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201774.

  • Dekkers W, Rikkert MO: What is a genetic cause? the example of Alzheimer's disease. Med Health Care Philos 2006, 9(3): 273-284. doi:10.1007/s11019-006-9005-7.

  • Dennis C: Genetics: deaf by design. Nature 2004, 431(7011):894-896. doi: 10.1038/431894a.

  • Diniz D: Reproductive autonomy: a case study on deafness [Autonomia reprodutiva: um estudo de caso sobre a surdez]. Cad Saude Publica 2003, 19(1):175-181.

  • Donaldson ZR, Young LJ: Oxytocin, vasopressin, and the neurogenetics of sociality. Science 2008, 322(5903):900-904. doi: 10.1126/science.1158668.

  • Dorsey ER et al.: Knowledge of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act among individuals affected by Huntington disease. Clin Genet 2013, 84(3): 251-257. doi:10.1111/cge.12065.

  • Duncan RE et al.: "You're one of us now": young people describe their experiences of predictive genetic testing for Huntington disease (HD) and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP). Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2008, 148C(1): 47-55. doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.30158.

  • Duncan RE et al.: An international survey of predictive genetic testing in children for adult onset conditions. Genet Med 2005, 7(6): 390-396. doi: 10.109701.GIM.0000170775.39092.44.

  • Edge K: The benefits and potential harms of genetic testing for Huntington's disease: a case study. Hum Reprod Genet Ethics 2008, 14(2):14-19. doi:10.1558/hrge.v14i2.14.

  • Eggert K et al.: Data protection in biomaterial banks for Parkinson's disease research: the model of GEPARD (Gene Bank Parkinson's Disease Germany). Mov Disord 2007, 22(5): 611-618. doi:10.1002/mds.21331.

  • Eisen A et al.: SOD1 gene mutations in ALS patients from British Columbia, Canada: clinical features, neurophysiology and ethical issues in management. Amyotroph Lateral Scler 2008, 9(2): 108-119. doi:10.1080/17482960801900073.

  • Erez A Plunkett K, Sutton VR, McGuire AL: The right to ignore genetic status of late onset genetic disease in the genomic era: prenatal testing for Huntington disease as a paradigm. Am J Med Genet A 2010, 152A(7): 1774-1780. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.33432.

  • Erwin C Hersch S, Event Monitoring Committee of the Huntington Study Group: Monitoring reportable events and unanticipated problems: the PHAROS and PREDICT studies of Huntington disease. IRB 2007, 29(3): 11-16.

  • Erwin C et al.: Perception, experience, and response to genetic discrimination in Huntington disease: the international RESPOND-HD study. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 2010, 153B(5): 1081-1093. doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.31079.

  • Etchegary H: Discovering the family history of Huntington disease. J Genet Couns 2006, 15(2): 105-117. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9018-7.

  • Fahmy MS: On the supposed moral harm of selecting for deafness. Bioethics 2011, 25(3):128-136. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01752.x.

  • Fanos JH, Gelinas DF, Miller RG: "You have shown me my end": attitudes toward presymptomatic testing for familial Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Am J Med Genet A 2004, 129A(3):248-253. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.30178.

  • Fins JJ: "Humanities are the hormones:" Osler, Penfield and "neuroethics" revisited. Am J Bioeth 2008, 8(1):W5-8. doi:10.1080/15265160801891227.

  • Finucane B, Haas-Givler B, Simon EW: Genetics, mental retardation, and the forging of new alliances. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2003, 117C(1):66-72. doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.10021.

  • Forrest Keenan K et al.: How young people find out about their family history of Huntington's disease. Soc Sci Medi 2009, 68(10):1892-1900. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.02.049.

  • Fu S, Dong J, Wang C, Chen G: Parental attitudes toward genetic testing for prelingual deafness in China. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2010, 74(10):1122-1125. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2010.06.012.

  • Fukushima Y: [Pediatric neurological disorders and genetic counseling.] No to Hattatsu 2003, 35(4): 285-291.

  • Gillam L, Poulakis Z, Tobin S, Wake M: Enhancing the ethical conduct of genetic research: investigating views of parents on including their healthy children in a study on mild hearing loss. J Med Ethics 2006, 32(9):537-541. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.013201.

  • Giordano J: Neuroethical issues in neurogenetic and neuro-implantation technology: the need for pragmatism and preparedness in practice and policy. Stud Ethics Law and Technol 2011, 4(3). doi:10.2202/1941-6008.1152.

  • Godard B, Cardinal G: Ethical implications in genetic counseling and family studies of the epilepsies. Epilepsy Behav 2004, 5(5):621-626. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2004.06.016.

  • Goh AM et al.: Perception, experience, and response to genetic discrimination in Huntington's disease: the Australian results of the International RESPOND-HD study. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 2013, 17(2):115-121. doi:10.1089/gtmb.2012.0288.

  • Goldman JS, Hou CE: Early-onset Alzheimer disease: when is genetic testing appropriate? Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2004, 18(2): 65-67.

  • Golomb MR, Garg BP, Walsh LE, Williams LS: Perinatal stroke in baby, prothrombotic gene in mom: does this affect maternal health insurance? Neurology 2005, 65(1):13-16. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000167543.83897.fa.

  • Goodey CF: On certainty, reflexivity and the ethics of genetic research into intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res 2003, 47(Pt 7):548-554.

  • Gordon SC, Landa D: Disclosure of the genetic risk of Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med 2010, 362(2):181-2. doi:10.1056/NEJMc096300.

  • Grant R, Flint K: Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy: a commentary by the Canadian Down Syndrome Society. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2007, 29(7):580-582.

  • Green RC et al.: Disclosure of APOE genotype for risk of Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med 2007, 361(3):245-254. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0809578.

  • Gross ML: Ethics, policy, and rare genetic disorders: the case of Gaucher disease in Israel. Theor Med Bioeth 2002, 23(2):151-170.

  • Guillemin M, Gillam L: (2006). Attitudes to genetic testing for deafness: the importance of informed choice. J Genet Couns 2006, 15(1):51-59. doi:10.1007/s10897-005-9003-6.

  • Guzauskas GF, Lebel RR: The duty to re-contact for newly appreciated risk factors: Fragile X premutation. J Clin Ethics 2006, 17(1):46-52.

  • Harper PS et al.: Genetic testing and Huntington's disease: issues of employment. Lancet Neurol 2004, 3(4):249-252. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00711-2.

  • Harris JC: Advances in understanding behavioral phenotypes in neurogenetic syndromes. Am J Medical Genet C Semin Med Genet 2010, 154C(4): 389-399. doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.30276.

  • Hassan A, Markus HS: Practicalities of genetic studies in human stroke. Methods Mol Med 2005, 104:223-240. doi: 10.1385/1-59259-836-6:223.

  • Hawkins AK, Ho A, Hayden MR: Lessons from predictive testing for Huntington disease: 25 years on. J Med Genet 2011, 48(10):649-650. doi:10.1136/jmedgenet-2011-100352.

  • Haworth A et al.: Call for participation in the neurogenetics consortium within the Human Variome Project. Neurogenetics 2011, 12(3):169-73. doi: 10.1007/s10048-011-0287-4.

  • Hayry M: There is a difference between selecting a deaf embryo and deafening a hearing child. J Med Ethics 2004, 30(5):510-512. doi: 10.1136/jme.2002.001891.

  • Hipps YG, Roberts JS, Farrer LA, Green RC: Differences between African Americans and whites in their attitudes toward genetic testing for Alzheimer's disease. Genet Test 2003, 7(1):39-44. doi:10.1089/109065703321560921.

  • Holland A, Clare IC: The Human Genome Project: considerations for people with intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disabil Res 2003, 47(Pt 7): 515-525. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2003.00530.x.

  • Holt K: What do we tell the children? Contrasting the disclosure choices of two HD families regarding risk status and predictive genetic testing. J Genet Couns 2006, 15(4):253-265. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9021-z.

  • Hoop JG, Spellecy R: Philosophical and ethical issues at the forefront of neuroscience and genetics: an overview for psychiatrists. Psychiatr Clin North Am 2009, 32(2): 437-449. doi:10.1016/j.psc.2009.03.004.

  • Horiguchi T, Kaga M, Inagaki M: [Assessment of chromosome and gene analysis for the diagnosis of the fragile X syndrome in Japan: annual incidence.] No To Hattatsu 2005, 37(4):301-306.

  • Huniche L: Moral landscapes and everyday life in families with Huntington's disease: aligning ethnographic description and bioethics. Soc Sci Med 2011, 72(11):1810-1816. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.06.039.

  • Hurley AC et al.: Genetic susceptibility for Alzheimer's disease: why did adult offspring seek testing? Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2005, 20(6):374-381.

  • Illes F et al.: Einstellung zu genetischen untersuchungen auf Alzheimer-Demenz [Attitudes towards predictive genetic testing for Alzheimer's disease.] Z Gerontol Geriatr 2006, 39(3): 233-239. doi:10.1007/s00391-006-0377-3.

  • Inglis A, Hippman C, Austin JC: Prenatal testing for Down syndrome: the perspectives of parents of individuals with Down syndrome. Am J Med Genet A 2012, 158A(4): 743-750. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.35238.

  • Johnston T: In one's own image: ethics and the reproduction of deafness. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2005, 10(4):426-441. doi: 10.1093/deafed/eni040.

  • Kane RA, Kane RL: Effect of genetic testing for risk of Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med 2009, 361(3):298-299. doi:10.1056/NEJMe0903449.

  • Kang PB: Ethical issues in neurogenetic disorder. Handb Clin Neurol 2013, 118:265-276. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53501-6.00022-6.

  • Kim SY et al.: Volunteering for early phase gene transfer research in Parkinson disease. Neurology 2006, 66(7):1010-1015. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000208925.45772.ea

  • King NM: Genes and Tourette syndrome: scientific, ethical, and social implications. Adv Neurol 2006, 99:144-147.

  • Kissela BM et al.: Proband race/ethnicity affects pedigree completion rate in a genetic study of ischemic stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2008, 17(5):299-302. doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2008.02.011.

  • Klein C, Ziegler A: From GWAS to clinical utility in Parkinson's disease. Lancet 2011, 377(9766):613-614. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60062-7.

  • Klein CJ, Dyck PJ: Genetic testing in inherited peripheral neuropathies. J Peripher Nerv Syst 2005, 10(1):77-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1085-9489.2005.10111.x.

  • Klitzman R et al.: Decision-making about reproductive choices among individuals at-risk for Huntington's disease. J Genet Couns 2007, 16(3):347-362. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9080-1.

  • Krajewski KM, Shy ME: Genetic testing in neuromuscular disease. Neurol Clin 2004, 22(3):481-508. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2004.03.003.

  • Kromberg JG, Wessels TM: Ethical issues and Huntington's disease. S Afr Med J 2013, 103(12 Suppl 1):1023-1026. doi:10.7196/samj.7146.

  • Kullmann DM, Schorge S, Walker MC, Wykes RC: Gene therapy in epilepsy-is it time for clinical trials? Nat Rev Neurol 2014, 10(5):300-304. doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2014.43.

  • Labrune P: Diagnostic genetique pre-implantatoire de la choree de Huntington sans savoir si le parent est attaint. [Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis of Huntington's chorea without disclosure if the parent "at risk" is affected.] Arch Pediatr 2003, 10(2):169-170.

  • Laney DA et al.: Fabry Disease practice guidelines: recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Couns 2013, 22(5):555-564. doi: 10.1007/s10897-013-9613-3

  • LaRusse S et al.: Genetic susceptibility testing versus family history-based risk assessment: impact on perceived risk of Alzheimer disease. Genet Med 2005, 7(1):48-53. doi: 10.109701.GIM.0000151157.13716.6C.

  • Le Hellard S, Hanson I: The Imaging and Cognition Genetics Conference 2011, ICG 2011: a meeting of minds. Front Neurosci 2012, 6:74 doi: 10.3389/fnins.2012.00074.

  • Leuzy A, Gauthier S: Ethical issues in Alzheimer's disease: an overview. Expert Rev Neurother 2012, 12(5):557-567. doi:10.1586/ern.12.38.

  • Mand C et al.: Genetic selection for deafness: the views of hearing children of deaf adults. J Med Ethics 2009, 35(12):722-728. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.030429.

  • Marcheco-Teruel B, Fuentes-Smith E: Attitudes and knowledge about genetic testing before and after finding the disease-causing mutation among individuals at high risk for familial, early-onset Alzheimer's disease. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 2009, 13(1):121-125. doi:10.1089/gtmb.2008.0047.

  • Mathews KD: Hereditary causes of chorea in childhood. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2003, 10(1):20-25.

  • McGrath RJ et al.: Access to genetic counseling for children with autism, Down syndrome, and intellectual disabilities. Pediatrics 2009, 124 Suppl 4:S443-449. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-1255Q.

  • Meininger HP: Intellectual disability, ethics and genetics--a selected bibliography. J Intellect Disabil Res 2003, 47(Pt 7):571-576.

  • Meschia JF, Merino JG: Reporting of informed consent and ethics committee approval in genetics studies of stroke. J Med Ethics 2003, 29(6):371-372.

  • Molnar MJ, Bencsik P: Establishing a neurological-psychiatric biobank: banking, informatics, ethics. Cell Immunol 2006, 244(2):101-104. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2007.02.013.

  • Moscarillo TJ et al.: Knowledge of and attitudes about Alzheimer disease genetics: report of a pilot survey and two focus groups. Community Genet 2007, 10(2): 97-102. 10.1159/000099087.

  • Mrazek DA: Psychiatric pharmacogenomic testing in clinical practice. Dialogues Clin Neurosci 2010, 12(1): 66-76.

  • Munoz-Sanjuan I, Bates GP: The importance of integrating basic and clinical research toward the development of new therapies for Huntington disease. J Clin Invest 2011, 121(2):476-483. doi:10.1172/JCI45364.

  • Nance WE: The genetics of deafness. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2003, 9(2):109-119. doi:10.1002/mrdd.10067.

  • Nunes R: Deafness, genetics and dysgenics. Med Health Care Philos 2006, 9(1):25-31. doi:10.1007/s11019-005-2852-9.

  • Olde Rikkert MG et al.: Consensus statement on genetic research in dementia. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2008, 23(3):262-266. doi:10.1177/1533317508317817.

  • Ottman R, Berenson K, Barker-Cummings C: Recruitment of families for genetic studies of epilepsy. Epilepsia 2005, 46(2):290-297. doi: 10.1111/j.0013-9580.2005.41904.x.

  • Ottman R et al.: Genetic testing in the epilepsies--report of the ILAE Genetics Commission. Epilepsia 2010, 51(4):655-670. doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02429.x.

  • Paulson HL: Diagnostic testing in neurogenetics: principles, limitations, and ethical considerations. Neurol Clin 2002, 20(3):627-643.

  • Petrini C: Guidelines for genetic counselling for neurological diseases: ethical issues. Minerva Med 2011, 102(2):149-159.

  • Poland S: Intellectual disability, genetics, and ethics: a review. Ethics Intellect Disabil 2004, 8(1):1-2.

  • Ramani D, Saviane C: Genetic tests: between risks and opportunities: the case of neurodegenerative diseases. EMBO Rep 2010, 11(12):910-913. doi:10.1038/embor.2010.177.

  • Raspberry K, Skinner D: Enacting genetic responsibility: experiences of mothers who carry the fragile X gene. Sociol Health Illn 2011, 33(3):420-433. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01289.x.

  • Raymond FL: Genetic services for people with intellectual disability and their families. J Intellect Disabil Res 2003, 47(7):509-514. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2003.00529.x.

  • Reinders HS: Introduction to intellectual disability, genetics and ethics. J Intellect Disabil Res 2003, 47(7):501-504. doi:

  • Reinvang I et al.: Neurogenetic effects on cognition in aging brains: a window of opportunity for intervention? Front Aging Neurosci 2010, 2:143. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2003.00527.x10.3389/fnagi.2010.00143.

  • Richards FH: Maturity of judgement in decision making for predictive testing for nontreatable adult-onset neurogenetic conditions: a case against predictive testing of minors. Clinical Genetics 2006, 70(5):396-401. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2006.00696.x.

  • Roberts JS, Chen CA, Uhlmann WR, Green RC: Effectiveness of a condensed protocol for disclosing APOE genotype and providing risk education for Alzheimer disease. Genet Med 2012, 14(8):742-748. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.37.

  • Roberts JS, Uhlmann WR: Genetic susceptibility testing for neurodegenerative diseases: ethical and practice issues. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110:89-101. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.02.005.

  • Robins Wahlin TB: To know or not to know: a review of behaviour and suicidal ideation in preclinical Huntington's disease. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 65(3): 279-287. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.08.009.

  • Rojo A, Corbella C: Utilidad de los estudios geneticos y de neuroimagen en el diagnostico diferencial de la enfermedad de Parkinson [The value of genetic and neuroimaging studies in the differential diagnosis of Parkinson's disease.] Rev Neurol 2009, 48(9):482-488.

  • Romero LJ et al.: Emotional responses to APO E genotype disclosure for Alzheimer disease. J Genet Couns 2005, 14(2):141-150. doi:10.1007/s10897-005-4063-1.

  • Ryan M, Miedzybrodzka Z, Fraser L, Hall M: Genetic information but not termination: pregnant women's attitudes and willingness to pay for carrier screening for deafness genes. J MedGenet 2003, 40(6):e80.

  • Savulescu J: Education and debate: deaf lesbians, "designer disability," and the future of medicine. BMJ 2002, 325(7367):771-773. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7367.771.

  • Schanker BD: Neuroimaging genetics and epigenetics in brain and behavioral nosology. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4):44-46. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.721465.

  • Schneider SA, Klein C: What is the role of genetic testing in movement disorders practice? Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2011, 11(4):351-361. doi:10.1007/s11910-011-0200-4.

  • Schneider SA, Schneider UH, Klein C: Genetic testing for neurologic disorders. Semin Neurol 2011, 31(5):542-552. doi:10.1055/s-0031-1299792.

  • Schulze TG, Fangerau H, Propping P: From degeneration to genetic susceptibility, from eugenics to genethics, from Bezugsziffer to LOD score: the history of psychiatric genetics. Int Rev Psychiatry 2004, 16(4), 246-259. doi: 10.1080/09540260400014419.

  • Semaka A, Creighton S, Warby S, Hayden MR: Predictive testing for Huntington disease: interpretation and significance of intermediate alleles. Clin Genet 2006, 70(4):283-294. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2006.00668.x.

  • Semaka A, Hayden MR: Evidence-based genetic counselling implications for Huntington disease intermediate allele predictive test results. Clin Genet 2014, 85(4):303-311. doi:10.1111/cge.12324.

  • Serretti A, Artioli P: Ethical problems in pharmacogenetics studies of psychiatric disorders. Pharmacogenomics J 2006, 6(5): 289-295. doi: 10.1038/sj.tpj.6500388.

  • Sevick MA, McConnell T, Muender M: Conducting research related to treatment of Alzheimer's disease: ethical issues. J Gerontol Nurs 2003, 29(2):6-12. doi: 10.3928/0098-9134-20030201-05.

  • Shekhawat GS et al.: Implications in disclosing auditory genetic mutation to a family: a case study. Int J Audiol 2007, 46(7):384-387. doi: 10.1080/14992020701297805.

  • Shostak S, Ottman R: Ethical, legal, and social dimensions of epilepsy genetics. Epilepsia 2006, 47(10):1595-1602. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2006.00632.x.

  • Smith JA, Stephenson M, Jacobs C, Quarrell O: Doing the right thing for one's children: deciding whether to take the genetic test for Huntington's disease as a moral dilemma. Clin Genet 2013, 83(5):417-421. doi:10.1111/cge.12124.

  • Synofzik M: Was passiert im Gehirn meines Patienten? Neuroimaging und Neurogenetik als ethische Herausforderungen in der Medizin. [What happens in the brain of my patients? neuroimaging and neurogenetics as ethical challenges in medicine.] Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007, 132(49), 2646-2649. doi:10.1055/s-2007-993114.

  • Tabrizi SJ, Elliott CL, Weissmann C: Ethical issues in human prion diseases. Br Med Bull 2003, 66:305-316.

  • Tairyan K, Illes J: Imaging genetics and the power of combined technologies: a perspective from neuroethics. Neuroscience 2009, 164(1):7-15. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.01.052.

  • Tan EC, Lai PS: Molecular diagnosis of neurogenetic disorders involving trinucleotide repeat expansions. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2005, 5(1):101-109. doi: 10.1586/14737159.5.1.101.

  • Taneja PR et al.: Attitudes of deaf individuals towards genetic testing. Am J Med Genet A 2004, 130A(1):17-21. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.30051.

  • Taylor S: Gender differences in attitudes among those at risk for Huntington's disease. Genet Test 2005, 9(2):152-157. doi:10.1089/gte.2005.9.152.

  • Taylor SD: Predictive genetic test decisions for Huntington's disease: context, appraisal and new moral imperatives. Soc Sci Med 2004, 58(1):137-149. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00155-2.

  • Toda T: Personal genome research and neurological diseases: overview. Brain Nerve 2013, 65(3):227-234.

  • Todd RM, Anderson AK: The neurogenetics of remembering emotions past. Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A 2009, 106(45):18881-18882. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0910755106.

  • Toufexis M, Gieron-Korthals M: Early testing for Huntington disease in children: pros and cons. J Child Neurol 2010, 25(4):482-484. doi:10.1177/0883073809343315.

  • Towner D, Loewy RS: Ethics of preimplantation diagnosis for a woman destined to develop early-onset Alzheimer disease. JAMA 2002, 287(8):1038-1040.

  • Valente EM, Ferraris A, Dallapiccola B: Genetic testing for paediatric neurological disorders. Lancet Neurol 2008, 7(12):1113-1126. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70257-6.

  • van der Vorm A et al.: Genetic research into Alzheimer's disease: a European focus group study on ethical issues. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2008, 23(1):11-15. doi: 10.1002/gps.1825.

  • van der Vorm A et al.: Experts' opinions on ethical issues of genetic research into Alzheimer's disease: results of a Delphi study in the Netherlands. Clin Genet 2010, 77(4):382-388. doi:10.1111/j.1399-0004.2009.01323.x.

  • van der Vorm A et al.: Ethical aspects of research into Alzheimer disease. a European Delphi study focused on genetic and non-genetic research. J Med Ethics 2009, 35(2):140-144. doi:10.1136/jme.2008.025049.

  • Vehmas S: Is it wrong to deliberately conceive or give birth to a child with mental retardation? J Med Philos 2002, 27(1):47-63. doi:10.1076/jmep.27.1.47.2974.

  • Wehbe RM: When to tell and test for genetic carrier status: perspectives of adolescents and young adults from fragile X families. Am J Med Genet A 2009, 149A(6):1190-1199. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32840.

  • Williams JK et al.: In their own words: reports of stigma and genetic discrimination by people at risk for Huntington disease in the International RESPOND-HD study. Am J Medical Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 2010, 153B(6):1150-1159. doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.31080.

  • Withrow KA et al.: Impact of genetic advances and testing for hearing loss: results from a national consumer survey. Am J Med Genet A 2009, 149A(6):1159-1168. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32800.

  • Wusthoff CJ, Olson DM: Genetic testing in children with epilepsy. Continuum (Minneap Minn) 2013, 19(3 Epilepsy):795-800. doi:10.1212/01.CON.0000431393.39099.89.

  • Yen RJ: Tourette's syndrome: a case example for mandatory genetic regulation of behavioral disorders. Law Psychol Rev 2003, 27:29-54.

Books:
  • Browner CH, Preloran HM: Neurogenetic Diagnoses: The Power of Hope and the Limits of Today’s Medicine. London: Routledge; 2009.

  • Evers-Kiebooms G, Zoeteweij MW, Harper PS: Prenatal Testing for Late-onset Neurogenetic Diseases. Oxford: BIOS Scientific; 2002.

  • Lynch DR: Neurogenetics: Scientific and Clinical Advances. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2006.

Book chapters:
  • Bernat JL: Neurogenetic diseases. In his Ethical Issues in Neurology. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2002:409-437.

  • Blank RH: The human brain: an introduction: the brain and genetics. In his Intervention in the Brain: Politics, Policy and Ethics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2013:16-21.

  • Caplan AL, Farah MJ: Emerging ethical issues in neurology, psychiatry, and the neurosciences. In The Molecular and Genetic Basis of Neurologic and Psychiatric Disease (3rd ed.). Edited by Roger N. Rosenberg, Stanley B. Prusiner, Salvatore DiMauro, Robert L. Barchi, Eric J. Nestler. Philadelphia, PA: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2003:109-114.

  • Evers-Kiehooms G: Comments from the praxis of predictive testing, prenatal testing, and preimplantation genetic diagnosis for late-onset neurogenetic disease: the example of Huntington's disease. In Genetics, Theology and Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Conversation. Edited by Lisa Sowle Cahill. New York: Crossroad Publication Company; 2005:171-180.

  • Fairhurst M: Neurogenetic imaging. In Gene Therapy: Prospective Technology Assessment in its Societal Context. Edited by Jörg Niewöhner, Christof Tannert. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing; 2006:77-87.

  • FitzGerald K, Wurzman R: Neurogenetics and ethics: how scientific frameworks can better inform ethics. In Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Edited by James J. Giordano, Bert Gordijn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010: 216-229.

  • Green RM: From genome to brainome: charting the lessons learned. In Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice, and Policy. Edited by Judy Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006:105-121.

  • Giordano JJ: Neurogenetic and neural tissue-implantation technology: neuroethical, legal, and social issues. In his Neurotechnology: Premises, Potential, and Problems. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012:59-68.

  • Hsiung GYR: Ethical concerns and pitfalls in neurogenetic testing. In Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:529-552.

  • Stein, D: Philosophy and cognitive-affective neurogenetics. In Philosophy as Cognitive Neuroscience: Philosophical Perspectives. Edited by Matthew R. Broome, Lisa Bortolotti. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009:193-201.

  • Uhlmann WR: Ethical dilemmas in neurogenetics. In Neurogenetics: Scientific and Clinical Advances. Edited by David R. Lynch. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2006: 87-103.

  • Zarzeczny A, Caulfield T: Public representations of neurogenetics. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:715-728.

Neurobiomarkers:
  • Arias JJ, Karlawish J: Confidentiality in preclinical Alzheimer disease studies: when research and medical records meet. Neurology 2014, 82(8):725-729. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000000153.

  • Choudhury S, Gold I, Kirmayer LJ: From brain image to the Bush doctrine: critical neuroscience and the political uses of neurotechnology. AJOB Neurosci 2010, 1(2):17-19. doi: 10.1080/21507741003699280.

  • Dani KA, McCormick MT, Muir KW: Brain lesion volume and capacity for consent in stroke trials: Potential regulatory barriers to the use of surrogate markers. Stroke 2008, 39(8):2336-2340. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.507111.

  • Davis JK: Justice, insurance, and biomarkers of aging. Exp Gerontol 2010, 45(10):814-818. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2010.02.004.

  • Davis KD, Racine E, Collett B: Neuroethical issues related to the use of brain imaging: can we and should we use brain imaging as a biomarker to diagnose chronic pain? Pain 2012, 153(8):1555-1559. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2012.02.037.

  • Dresser R: Pre-emptive suicide, precedent autonomy and preclinical Alzheimer disease. J Med Ethics 2014, 40(8):550-551. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101615.

  • Farah MJ, Gillihan SJ: The puzzle of neuroimaging and psychiatric diagnosis: technology and nosology in an evolving discipline. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(4):31-41. doi:10.1080/21507740.2012.713072.

  • Gauthier S, Leuzy A, Racine E, Rosa-Neto P: Diagnosis and management of Alzheimer's disease: past, present and future ethical issues. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110:102-113. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.01.003.

  • Giordano J, Abramson K, Boswell MV: Pain assessment: subjectivity, objectivity, and the use of neurotechnology. Pain Physician 2010, 13(4):305-315.

  • Goswami U: Principles of learning, implications for teaching: a cognitive neuroscience perspective. J Philos Educ 2008, 42(3-4):381-399. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00639.x.

  • Illes J, Rosen A, Greicius M, Racine E: Prospects for prediction: ethics analysis of neuroimaging in Alzheimer's disease. Ann NY Acad Sci 2007, 1097:278-295. doi: 10.1196/annals.1379.030.

  • Jones R: Biomarkers: casting the net wide. Nature 2010, 466(7310):S11-S12. doi: 10.1038/466S11a.

  • Karlawish J: Addressing the ethical, policy, and social challenges of preclinical Alzheimer disease. Neurology 2011, 77(15):1487-1493. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318232ac1a.

  • Klein E, Karlawish J: Ethical issues in the neurology of aging and cognitive decline. Handb Clin Neurol 2013, 118:233-242. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53501-6.00020-2.

  • Lakhan SE, Vieira KF, Hamlat E: Biomarkers in psychiatry: drawbacks and potential for misuse. Int Arch Med 2010, 3:1. doi: 10.1186/1755-7682-3-1.

  • Lehrner A, Yehuda R: Biomarkers of PTSD: military applications and considerations. Eur J Psychotraumatol 2014, 5. doi: 10.3402/ejpt.v5.23797.

  • Mattsson N, Brax D, Zetterberg H: To know or not to know: ethical issues related to early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Int J Alzheimers Dis 2010, 2010:841941. doi: 10.4061/2010/841941.

  • Peters KR, Lynn Beattie B, Feldman HH, Illes J: A conceptual framework and ethics analysis for prevention trials of Alzheimer disease. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110:114-123. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2012.12.001.

  • Petzold A et al.: Biomarker time out. Mult Scler 2014, 20(12):1560-63. doi: 10.1177/1352458514524999.

  • Pierce R: Complex calculations: ethical issues in involving at-risk healthy individuals in dementia research. J Med Ethics 2010, 36(9):553-557. doi: 10.1136/jme.2010.036335.

  • Porteri C, Frisoni GB: Biomarker-based diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease: how and what to tell: a kickstart to an ethical discussion. Front Aging Neurosci 2014, 6:41. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2014.00041.

  • Prvulovic D, Hampel H: Ethical considerations of biomarker use in neurodegenerative diseases—a case study of Alzheimer's disease. Prog Neurobiol 2011, 95(4):517-519. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2011.11.009.

  • Schicktanz S, et al.: Before it is too late: professional responsibilities in late-onset Alzheimer's research and pre-symptomatic prediction. Front Hum Neurosci 2014, 8:921. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00921.

  • Singh I, Rose N: Biomarkers in psychiatry. Nature 2009, 460(7252):202-207. doi: 10.1038/460202a.

  • Tarquini D, et al. [Diagnosing Alzheimer's disease: from research to clinical practice and ethics]. Recenti Prog Med 2014, 105(7-8):295-299. doi: 10.1701/1574.17116.

  • Walsh P, Elsabbagh M, Bolton P, Singh I: In search of biomarkers for autism: scientific, social and ethical challenges. Nat Rev Neurosci 2011, 12(10):603-612. doi:10.1038/nrn3113.

  • Zizzo N, et al.: Comments and reflections on ethics in screening for biomarkers of prenatal alcohol exposure. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2013, 37(9):1451-1455. doi: 10.1111/acer.12115.

Books:
  • Lerner AC, Lerner AW: Alzheimer's Disease. Detroit: Greenhaven Press; 2009.

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Dementia: Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics; 2009.

  • Galimberti D, Scarpini E. Biomarkers for Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease. New York: Nova Biomedical Books; 2008.

  • Singh I, Sinnott-Armstrong WP, Savulescu J: Bioprediction, Biomarkers, and Bad Behavior: Scientific, Legal, and Ethical Challenges. New York: Oxford University Press; 2014.

  • Takeda M, Toshihisa T, Cacabelos R: Molecular Neurobiology of Alzheimer Disease and Related Disorders. Basel: Karger; 2004.

Book Chapters:
  • Albert MS, McKhann GM: Neuroethical issues in early detection of Alzheimer's disease. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:553-562.

  • Burger K, Hampel H: Biomarkers for the dementias. In American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Alzheimer Disease and Other Dementias. Edited by Myron F. Weiner, Anne M. Lipton. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2009:407-421.

  • Dunnett SB, Björklund, A: Stroke: clinical trials: potential biomarkers. In their Functional Neural Transplantation III: Primary and Stem Cell Therapies for Brain Repair. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2012:155-156.

  • Hall WD, Gartner CE, Mathews R, Munafo M: Technical, ethical and social issues in the bioprediction of addiction liability and treatment response. In Addiction Neuroethics: The Ethics of Addiction Neuroscience Research and Treatment. Edited by Adrian Carter, Wayne Hall, Judy Illes. London: Academic Press; 2012:116-138.

  • Harris JR, Gruenewald TL, Seeman T: An overview of biomarker research from community and population-based studies on aging. In Biosocial Surveys. Edited by Maxine Weinstein, James W. Vaupel, Kenneth W. Wachter, National Research Council (U.S.) Committee on Advances in Collecting and Utilizing Biological Indicators and Genetic Information in Social Science Surveys, National Research Council (U.S.) Committee on Population. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2008:96-135.

  • Haynes, J. (2014). The neural code for intentions in the human brain. In Bioprediction, Biomarkers, and Bad Behavior: Scientific, Legal, and Ethical Challenges. Edited by Ilian Singh, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Julian Savulescu. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014:173-187.

  • Lakhan SE, Vieira KF: The ethical ramifications of biomarker use for mood disorders. In Handbook of Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders (Volume III). Edited by Michael S. Ritsner. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2011:421-437.

  • Lock M: The future is now: locating biomarkers for dementia. In Biomedicine as Culture: Instrumental Practices, Technoscientific Knowledge, and New Modes of Life. Edited by Regula Valérie Burri, Joseph Dumit. New York: Routledge; 2007:61-85.

  • Rutter M: Biomarkers: potential and challenges. In Bioprediction, Biomarkers, and Bad Behavior: Scientific, Legal, and Ethical Challenges. Oxford University Press. Edited by Ilian Singh, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Julian Savulescu. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014:188-205.

  • Silva G, Furie K: Biomarkers in neurology. In Clinical Trials in the Neurosciences. Edited by K.M. Woodbury-Harris, B.M. Coull. Basel; New York: Karger; 2009:55-61.

  • Wolpe PR: Rethinking the implications of discovering biomarkers for biologically based criminality. In Bioprediction, Biomarkers, and Bad Behavior: Scientific, Legal, and Ethical Challenges. Edited by Ilina Singh, Walter P. Sinnott-Armstrong, Julian Savulescu. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:118–130.

Neuropsychopharmacology:
  • Anderson IM: Drug information not regulation is needed. J Psychopharmacol 2004, 18(1): 7-13. doi: 10.1177/0269881104040205.

  • Anderson KS, Bjorklund P: Demystifying federal nursing home regulations to improve the effectiveness of psychopharmacological care. Perspect Psychiatr Care 2010, 46(2): 152-162. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6163.2010.00251.x.

  • Appelbaum PS: Psychopharmacology and the power of narrative. Am J Bioeth 2005, 5(3): 48-49. doi: 10.1080/15265160591002773.

  • Arun M, Jagadish Rao PP, Menezes RG: The present legal perspective of narcoanalysis: winds of change in India. Med Leg J 2010, 78(Pt 4): 138-141. doi:10.1258/mlj.2010.010024.

  • Bailey JE: The application of good clinical practice to challenge tests. J Psychopharmacol 2004, 18(1): 16. doi:10.1177/0269881104040210.

  • Belitz J, Bailey RA: Clinical ethics for the treatment of children and adolescents: a guide for general psychiatrists. Psychiatr Clin North Am 2009, 32(2): 243-257. doi:10.1016/j.psc.2009.02.001.

  • Benedetti F, Carlino E, Pollo A: How placebos change the patient's brain. Neuropsychopharmacology 2011, 36 (1): 339-354. doi: 10.1038/npp.2010.81.

  • Bjorklund P: Can there be a 'cosmetic' psychopharmacology? Prozac unplugged: the search for an ontologically distinct cosmetic psychopharmacology. Nurs Philos 2005, 6(2): 131-143. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-769X.2005.00213.x.

  • Breithaupt H, Weigmann K: Manipulating your mind. EMBO Rep 2004, 5(3), 230-232. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400109.

  • Browning D: Internists of the mind or physicians of the soul: does psychiatry need a public philosophy? Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2003, 37(2): 131-137. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2003.01135.x.

  • Caplan A: Accepting a helping hand can be the right thing to do. J Med Ethics 2013, 39(6), 367-368. doi:10.1136/medethics-2012-100879.

  • Cerullo MA: Cosmetic psychopharmacology and the President's Council on Bioethics. Perspect Biol Med 2006, 49(4): 515-523. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2006.0052.

  • Cheshire WP: Accelerated thought in the fast lane. Ethics Med 2009, 25(2): 75-78.

  • Cohan JA: Psychiatric ethics and emerging issues of psychopharmacology in the treatment of depression. J Contemp Health Law Policy 2003, 20(1):115-172.

  • Conti NA, Matusevich D: Problematic of gender in psychiatry. [Problematicas de genero en psiquiatria] Vertex 2008, 19(81): 269-270.

  • Czerniak E, Davidson M: Placebo, a historical perspective. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2012, 22(11): 770-774. doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2012.04.003.

  • Dell ML: Child and adolescent depression: psychotherapeutic, ethical, and related nonpharmacologic considerations for general psychiatrists and others who prescribe. Psychiatr Clin North Am 2012, 35(1):181-201. doi:10.1016/j.psc.2011.12.002.

  • Dell ML, Vaughan BS, Kratochvil CJ: Ethics and the prescription pad. Child Adoles Psychiatr Clin N Am 2008, 17(1): 93-111, ix. doi: 10.1016/j.chc.2007.08.003.

  • Derivan AT, et al.: The ethical use of placebo in clinical trials involving children. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 2004, 14(2): 169-174. doi:10.1089/1044546041649057.

  • DeVeaugh-Geiss J, et al.: Child and adolescent psychopharmacology in the new millennium: a workshop for academia, industry, and government. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2006, 45(3): 261-270. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000194568.70912.ee.

  • Earp BD, Wudarczyk OA, Sandberg A, Savulescu J: If I could just stop loving you: anti-love biotechnology and the ethics of a chemical breakup. Am J Bioeth 2013, 13(11): 3-17. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2013.839752.

  • Echarte Alonso LE: Therapeutic and cosmetic psychopharmacology: risks and limits [Psicofarmacologia terapeutica y cosmetic: riesgos y limites]. Cuad Bioet 2009, 20(69): 211-230.

  • Echarte Alonso LE: Neurocosmetics, transhumanism and eliminative materialism: toward new ways of eugenics [Neurocosmetica, transhumanismo y materialismo eliminativo: hacia nuevas formas de eugenesia]. Cuad Bioet 2012, 23(77): 37-51.

  • Eisenberg L: Psychiatry and human rights: welfare of the patient is in first place: acceptance speech for the Juan Jose Lopez Award. [Psychiatrie und menschenrechte: das wohl des patienten an erster stele: dankesrede fur die Juan Jose Lopez Ibor Auszeichnung]. Psychiatr Danub 2009, 21(3): 266-275.

  • Evers K: Personalized medicine in psychiatry: ethical challenges and opportunities. Dialogues Clin Neurosci 2009, 11(4): 427-434.

  • Fava GA: Conflict of interest in psychopharmacology: can Dr. Jekyll still control Mr. Hyde? Psychother Psychosom 2004, 73(1):1-4. doi:10.1159/000074433.

  • Fava GA: The intellectual crisis of psychiatric research. Psychother Psychosom 2006, 75(4): 202-208. doi: 10.1159/000092890.

  • Fava GA: The decline of pharmaceutical psychiatry and the increasing role of psychological medicine. Psychother Psychosom 2009, 78(4): 220-227. doi:10.1159/000214443.

  • Frank E, Novick DM, Kupfer DJ: Beyond the question of placebo controls: ethical issues in psychopharmacological drug studies. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 171(1): 19-26. doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1477-z.

  • Frecska E: Neither with you, nor with you: preferably with you [Se veluk, se nelkuluk: megis inkabb veluk]. Neuropsychopharmacol Hung 2004, 6(2): 61-62.

  • Gelenberg AJ, Freeman MP: The art (and blood sport) of psychopharmacology research: who has a dog in the fight? J Clin Psychiatry 2007, 68(2):185. doi: 10.4088/JCP.v68n0201.

  • Geppert C, Bogenschutz MP: Pharmacological research on addictions: a framework for ethical and policy considerations. J Psychoactive Drugs 2009, 41(1): 49-60. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2009.10400674.

  • Ghaemi SN: Toward a Hippocratic psychopharmacology. Can J Psychiatry 2008, 53(3):189-196.

  • Ghaemi SN, Goodwin FK: The ethics of clinical innovation in psychopharmacology: challenging traditional bioethics. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2007, 2:26. doi: 10.1186/1747-5341-2-26.

  • Glannon W: Psychopharmacology and memory. J Med Ethics 2006, 32(2):74-78. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.012575.

  • Glass KC: Rebuttal to Dr Streiner: can the "evil" in the "lesser of 2 evils" be justified in placebo-controlled trials? Can J Psychiatry 2008, 53(7): 433.

  • Gordijn B, Dekkers W: Technology and the self. Med Health Care Philos 2007, 10(2):113-114. doi:10.1007/s11019-006-9046-y.

  • Greely HT: Knowing sin: making sure good science doesn't go bad. Cerebrum 2006, 1-8.

  • Griffith JL: Neuroscience and humanistic psychiatry: a residency curriculum. Acad Psychiatry 2014, 38(2):177-184. doi:10.1007/s40596-014-0063-5.

  • Gutheil TG: Reflections on ethical issues in psychopharmacology: an American perspective. Int J Law Psychiatry 2012, 35(5-6): 387-391. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.09.007.

  • Haroun AM: Ethical discussion of informed consent. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2005, 25(5): 405-406.

  • Jakovljević M: The side effects of psychopharmacotherapy: conceptual, explanatory, ethical and moral issues - creative psychopharmacology instead of toxic psychiatry. Psychiatr Danub 2009, 21(1): 86-90.

  • Jesani A: Willing participants and tolerant profession: medical ethics and human rights in narco-analysis. Indian J Med Ethics 2008, 5(3):130-135.

  • Kirmayer LJ, Raikhel E: From Amrita to substance D: psychopharmacology, political economy, and technologies of the self. Transcult Psychiatry 2009, 46(1): 5-15. doi:10.1177/1363461509102284.

  • Klein DF, et al.: Improving clinical trials: American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology recommendations. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2002, 59(3): 272-278. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.59.3.272.

  • Koelch M, Schnoor K, Fegert JM: Ethical issues in psychopharmacology of children and adolescents. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2008, 21(6): 598-605. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e328314b776.

  • Kolch M, et al.: Safeguarding children's rights in psychopharmacological research: ethical and legal issues. Curr Pharm Des 2010, 16(22): 2398-2406. doi: 10.2174/138161210791959881.

  • Koski G: Imagination and attention: protecting participants in psychopharmacological research. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 171(1): 56-57. doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1631-7.

  • Kotzalidis G, et al.: Ethical questions in human clinical psychopharmacology: should the focus be on placebo administration? J Psychopharmacol 2008, 22(6): 590-597. doi:10.1177/0269881108089576.

  • Krystal JH: Commentary: first, do no harm: then, do some good: ethics and human experimental psychopharmacology. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci 2002, 39(2): 89-91.

  • Langlitz N: The persistence of the subjective in neuropsychopharmacology: observations of contemporary hallucinogen research. Hist Human Sci 2010, 23(1): 37-57. doi: 10.1177/0952695109352413.

  • Levy N, Clarke S: Neuroethics and psychiatry. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2008, 21(6): 568-571. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e3283126769.

  • Lombard J: Synchronic consciousness from a neurological point of view: the philosophical foundations for neuroethics. Synthese 2008, 162(3): 439-450. doi: 10.1007/s11229-007-9246-x.

  • Malhotra S, Subodh BN: Informed consent & ethical issues in paediatric psychopharmacology. Indian J Med Res 2009, 129(1): 19-32.

  • McHenry L: Ethical issues in psychopharmacology. J Med Ethics 2006, 32(7): 405-410. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.013185.

  • Miskimen T, Marin H, Escobar J: Psychopharmacological research ethics: special issues affecting US ethnic minorities. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 171(1): 98-104. doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1630-8.

  • Mohamed AD, Sahakian BJ: The ethics of elective psychopharmacology. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2012, 15(4): 559-571. doi:10.1017/S146114571100037X.

  • Mohamed AD: Reducing creativity with psychostimulants may debilitate mental health and well-being. JMH 2014, 9(1): 146-163. doi:10.1080/15401383.2013.875865.

  • Morris GH, Naimark D, Haroun AM: Informed consent in psychopharmacology. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2005, 25(5): 403-406. doi: 10.1097/01.jcp.0000181028.12439.81.

  • Nierenberg AA, et al.: Critical thinking about adverse drug effects: lessons from the psychology of risk and medical decision-making for clinical psychopharmacology. Psychother Psychosom 2008, 77(4): 201-208. doi:10.1159/000126071.

  • Novella EJ: Mental health care in the aftermath of deinstitutionalization: a retrospective and prospective view. Health Care Anal 2010, 18(3): 222-238. doi:10.1007/s10728-009-0138-8.

  • Perlis RH, et al.: Industry sponsorship and financial conflict of interest in the reporting of clinical trials in psychiatry. Am J Psychiatry 2005, 162(10): 1957-1960. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.10.1957.

  • Puzyński S: Placebo in the investigation of psychotropic drugs, especially antidepressants. Sci Eng Ethics 2004, 10(1): 135-142. doi: 10.1007/s11948-004-0070-0.

  • Rihmer, Z., Dome, P., Baldwin, D. S., & Gonda, X. (2012). Psychiatry should not become hostage to placebo: an alternative interpretation of antidepressant-placebo differences in the treatment response in depression. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2012, 22(11): 782-786. doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2012.03.002.

  • Roberts LW, Krystal J: A time of promise, a time of promises: ethical issues in advancing psychopharmacological research. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 171(1): 1-5. doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1704-7.

  • Roberts LW, et al.: Schizophrenia patients' and psychiatrists' perspectives on ethical aspects of symptom re-emergence during psychopharmacological research participation. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 171(1): 58-67. doi:10.1007/s00213-002-1160-9.

  • Rosenstein DL, Miller FG: Ethical considerations in psychopharmacological research involving decisionally impaired subjects. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 171(1): 92-97. doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1503-1.

  • Rudnick A: The molecular turn in psychiatry: a philosophical analysis. The J Med Philos 2002, 27(3): 287-296. doi:10.1076/jmep.27.3.287.2979.

  • Rudnick A: Re: toward a Hippocratic psychopharmacology. Can J Psychiatry 2009, 54(6): 426.

  • Safer DJ: Design and reporting modifications in industry-sponsored comparative psychopharmacology trials. J Nerv Ment Dis 2002, 190(9): 583-592. doi:10.1097/01.NMD.0000030522.74800.0D.

  • Schermer MH: Brave new world versus island--utopian and dystopian views on psychopharmacology. Med Health Care Philos 2007, 10(2): 119-128. doi:10.1007/s11019-007-9059-1.

  • Schmal C, et al.: Pediatric psychopharmacological research in the post EU regulation 1901/2006 era. Z Kinder Jugendpsychiatr Psychother 2014, 42(6): 441-449. doi:10.1024/1422-4917/a000322.

  • Sententia W: Neuroethical considerations - cognitive liberty and converging technologies for improving human cognition. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004, 1013: 221-228. doi:10.1196/annals.1305.014.

  • Sergeant JA, et al.: Eunethydis: a statement of the ethical principles governing the relationship between the European group for ADHD guidelines, and its members, with commercial for-profit organisations. Eur Child Adoles Psychiatry 2010, 19(9): 737-739. doi: 10.1007/s00787-010-0114-8.

  • Singh I: Not robots: children's perspectives on authenticity, moral agency and stimulant drug treatments. J Med Ethics 2013, 39(6): 359-366. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100224. 

  • Singh I: Will the “real boy” please behave: dosing dilemmas for parents of boys with ADHD. Am J Bioeth 2005, 5(3): 34-47. doi: 10.1080/15265160590945129.

  • Smith ME, Farah MJ: Are prescription stimulants "smart pills"? the epidemiology and cognitive neuroscience of prescription stimulant use by normal health individuals. Psychol Bull 2011, 137(5): 717-741. doi: 10.1037/a0023825.

  • Sobredo LD, Levin SA: We hear about "gender psychopharmacology": are we listening well? [Se escucha hablar de psicofarmacologia de genero: estaremos escuchando bien?] Vertex 2008, 19(81): 276-279.

  • Stein DJ: Cosmetic psychopharmacology of anxiety: bioethical considerations. Curr Psychiatry Rep 2005, 7(4): 237-238. doi: 10.1007/s11920-005-0072-x.

  • Street LL, Luoma JB: Control groups in psychosocial intervention research: ethical and methodological issues. Ethics Behav 2002, 12(1): 1-30. doi:10.1207/S15327019EB1201_1.

  • Streiner DL: The lesser of 2 evils: the ethics of placebo-controlled trials. Can J Psychiatry 2008, 53(7): 430-432.

  • Strous RD: Ethical considerations in clinical training, care and research in psychopharmacology. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2011, 14(3): 413-424. doi:10.1017/S1461145710001112.

  • Suárez RM: Psychiatry and neuroethics [Psiquiatría y neuroética]. Vertex 2013, 24(109): 233-240.

  • Svenaeus F: Psychopharmacology and the self: an introduction to the theme. Med Health Care Philos 2007, 10(2): 115-117. doi:10.1007/s11019-007-9057-3.

  • Synofzik M: Intervening in the neural basis of one's personality: an ethical analysis of neuropharmacology and deep-brain stimulation [Eingriffe in die grundlagen der persönlichkeit: eine praxisorientierte ethische analyse von neuropharmaka und tiefhirnstimulation]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007, 132(50): 2711-2713. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-993124.

  • Synofzik M: Intervening in the neural basis of one's personality: a practice-oriented ethical analysis of neuropharmacology and deep-brain stimulation. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007, 132(50): 2711-2713. doi:10.1055/s-2007-993124.

  • Terbeck S, Chesterman LP: Will there ever be a drug with no or negligible side effects? evidence from neuroscience. Neuroethics 2014, 7(2): 189-194. doi: 10.1007/s12152-013-9195-7.

  • Thorens G, Gex-Fabry M, Zullino SF, Eytan A: Attitudes toward psychopharmacology among hospitalized patients from diverse ethno-cultural backgrounds. BMC Psychiatry 2008, 8:55. doi:10.1186/1471-244X-8-55.

  • Touwen DP, Engberts DP: Those famous red pills-deliberations and hesitations: ethics of placebo use in therapeutic and research settings. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2012, 22(11): 775-781. doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2012.03.005.

  • Vince G: Rewriting your past: drugs that rid people of terrifying memories could be a lifeline for many: but could they have a sinister side too? New Sci 2005, 188(2528): 32-35.

  • Vitiello B: Ethical considerations in psychopharmacological research involving children and adolescents. Psychopharmacology(Berl) 2003, 171(1): 86-91. doi:10.1007/s00213-003-1400-7.

  • Vrecko S: Neuroscience, power and culture: an introduction. Hist Human Sci 2010, 23(1): 1-10. doi: 10.1177/0952695109354395.

  • Weinmann S: Meta-analyses in psychopharmacotherapy: garbage in--garbage out?[Metaanalysen zur psychopharmakotherapie: garbage in--garbage out?]. Psychiatri Prax 2009, 36(6): 255-257. doi:10.1055/s-0029-1220425 [doi]

  • Wisner KL, et al.: Researcher experiences with IRBs: a survey of members of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology. IRB 2011, 33(5): 14-20. doi: 10.2307/23048300.

  • Young SN, Annable L: The ethics of placebo in clinical psychopharmacology: the urgent need for consistent regulation. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2002, 27(5): 319-321.

  • Young SN: Acute tryptophan depletion in humans: a review of theoretical, practical and ethical aspects. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2013, 38(5): 294-305. doi:10.1503/jpn.120209.

Books:
  • Borkenhagen A et al.: Die Selbstverbesserung des Menschen : Wunschmedizin und Enhancement aus Medizinpsychologischer Perspektive. Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag; 2012.

Book Chapters:
  • Bailey R: Changing your own mind: the neuroethics of psychopharmacology. In his Liberation Biology: The Scientific and Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books; 2005: 223-238.

  • Fukuyama F: Neuropharmacology and the control of behavior. In his Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2002: 41-56.

  • Hyman SE: Ethical issues in psychopharmacology: research and practice. Neuroethics: Mapping the Field. Edited by Steven J. Marcus. New York: Dana Press; 2002: 135-143.

  • Langlitz N: Neuropsychopharmacology as spiritual technology. In his Neuropsychedelia: The Revival of Hallucinogen Research since the Decade of the Brain. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2013: 1-23.

  • Pinals DA, Appelbaum PD: Ethical aspects of neuropsychiatric research with human subjects. In Neuropsychopharmacology: The Fifth Generation of Progress. Edited by Kenneth L. Davis, Dennis Charney, Joseph T. Coyle. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins; 2002: 475-483.

Mood stabilizers/anti-depressants/antipsychotic and nootropic agents:
  • Adam D, Kasper S, Moller HJ, Singer EA, 3rd European Expert Forum on Ethical Evaluation of Placebo-Controlled Studies in Depression: Placebo-controlled trials in major depression are necessary and ethically justifiable: how to improve the communication between researchers and ethical committees. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2005, 255(4):258-260. doi:10.1007/s00406-004-0555-5.

  • Agius M, Bradley V, Ryan D, Zaman R: The ethics of identifying and treating psychosis early. Psychiatr Danub 2008, 20(1):93-96.

  • Allison SK: Psychotropic medication in pregnancy: ethical aspects and clinical management. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs 2004, 18(3):194-205.

  • Alpert JE et al.: Enrolling research subjects from clinical practice: ethical and procedural issues in the sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR*D) trial. Psychiatry Res 2006, 141(2):193-200. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2005.04.007.

  • Amsterdam JD, McHenry LB: The paroxetine 352 bipolar trial: a study in medical ghostwriting. Int J Risk Saf Med 2012, 24(4):221-231. doi: 10.3233/JRS-2012-0571.

  • Anderson IM, Haddad PM: Prescribing antidepressants for depression: time to be dimensional and inclusive. Br J Gen Pract 2011, 61(582):50-52. doi:10.3399/bjgp11X548992.

  • Arcand M et al.: Should drugs be prescribed for prevention in the case of moderate to severe dementia? Revue Geriatr 2007, 32(3):189-200.

  • Aydin N et al.: A report by Turkish Association for Psychopharmacology on the psychotropic drug usage in Turkey and medical, ethical and economical consequences of current applications. Klinik Psikofarmakol Bülteni 2013, 23(4):390-402. doi:10.5455/bcp.20131230121254.

  • Baertschi B: The happiness pill…why not? [La pilule du bonheur… Pourquoi non?] Rev Med Suisse 2006, 2(90):2816-2820.

  • Baker CB et al.: Quantitative analysis of sponsorship bias in economic studies of antidepressants. Br J Psychiatry 2003, 183:498-506.

  • Baldwin D et al.: Placebo-controlled studies in depression: necessary, ethical and feasible. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2003, 253(1):22-28. doi:10.1007/s00406-003-0400-2.

  • Ballard C, Sorensen S, Sharp S: Pharmacological therapy for people with Alzheimer's disease: the balance of clinical effectiveness, ethical issues and social and healthcare costs. J Alzheimers Dis 2007, 12(1):53-59.

  • Bartlett P: A matter of necessity? enforced treatment under the Mental Health Act. R. (JB) v. Responsible Medical Officer Dr A Haddock, Mental Health Act Commission second opinion appointed doctor Dr Rigby, Mental Health Act Commission second opinion appointed Doctor Wood. Med Law Rev 2007, 15(1) 86-98. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwl027.

  • Basil B, Adetunji B, Mathews M, Budur K: Trial of risperidone in India--concerns. Br J Psychiatry 2006, 188:489-90; doi: 10.1192/bjp.188.5.489-b.

  • Berger JT, Majerovitz SD: Do elderly persons' concerns for family burden influence their preferences for future participation in dementia research? J Clin Ethics 2005, 16(2):108-115.

  • Bernheim E: Psychiatric medication as restraint: between autonomy and protection, is there place for a legal framework? [La medication psychiatrique comme contention : entre autonomie et protection, quelle place pour un cadre juridique ?] Sante Ment Que 2010, 35(2):163-184. doi: 10.7202/1000558ar.

  • Berns A: Dementia and antipsychotics: a prescription for problems. J Leg Med 2012, 33(4):553-569. doi:10.1080/01947648.2012.739067.

  • Biegler P: Autonomy, stress, and treatment of depression. BMJ 2008, 336(7652):1046-1048. doi:10.1136/bmj.39541.470023.AD.

  • Biegler P: Autonomy and ethical treatment in depression. Bioethics 2010, 24(4):179-189. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00710.x.

  • Block JJ: Ethical concerns regarding olanzapine versus placebo in patients prodromally symptomatic for psychosis. Am J Psychiatry 2006, 163(10):1838. doi: 10.1176/ajp.2006.163.10.1838.

  • Borger BA: Sell v. United States: the appropriate standard for involuntarily administering antipsychotic drugs to dangerous detainees for trial. Seton Hall Law Rev 2005, 35(3):1099-1120.

  • Broich K: Klinische pruefungen mit antidepressiva und antipsychotika. das fuer und wider von placebokontrollen [clinical trials using antidepressants and antipsychotics. the pros and cons of placebo control]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung – Gesundheitsschutz 2005, 48(5):541-547. doi: 10.1007/s00103-005-1038-1.

  • Buller T, Shriver A, Farah M: Broadening the focus. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2014, 23(2):124-128. doi:10.1017/S0963180113000650.

  • Charlton BG: If 'atypical' neuroleptics did not exist, it wouldn't be necessary to invent them: perverse incentives in drug development, research, marketing and clinical practice. Med Hypotheses 2005, 65(6):1005-1009. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2005.08.013.

  • Claassen D: Financial incentives for antipsychotic depot medication: ethical issues. J Med Ethics 2007, 33(4):189-193. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.016188.

  • Cohan JA: Psychiatric ethics and emerging issues of psychopharmacology in the treatment of depression. J Contemp Health Law Policy 2003, 20(1):115-172.

  • Cohen D, Jacobs DH: Randomized controlled trials of antidepressants: clinically and scientifically irrelevant. Debates in Neuroscience 2007, 1(1):44-54. doi: 10.1007/s11559-007-9002-x.

  • Couzin-Frankel J: A lonely crusade. Science 2014, 344(6186):793-797. doi: 10.1126/science.344.6186.793.

  • Coyne J: Lessons in conflict of interest: the construction of the martyrdom of David Healy and the dilemma of bioethics. Am J Bioeth 2005, 5(1):W3-14. doi: 10.1080/15265160590969114.

  • Davis JM et al.: Should we treat depression with drugs or psychological interventions? a reply to Ioannidis. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2011, 6:8. doi: 10.1186/1747-5341-6-8.

  • DeMarco JP, Ford PJ: Neuroethics and the ethical parity principle. Neuroethics 2014, 7(3):317-325. doi: 10.1007/s12152-014-9211-6.

  • Dhiman GJ, Amber KT: Pharmaceutical ethics and physician liability in side effects. J Med Humanit 2013, 34(4):497-503. doi:10.1007/s10912-013-9239-3.

  • Di Pietro N, Illes J, Canadian Working Group on Antipsychotic Medications and Children: Rising antipsychotic prescriptions for children and youth: cross-sectoral solutions for a multimodal problem. CMAJ 2014, 186(9):653-654. doi:10.1503/cmaj.131604.

  • Ecks S, Basu S: The unlicensed lives of antidepressants in India: generic drugs, unqualified practitioners, and floating prescriptions. Transcult Psychiatry 2009, 46(1):86-106. doi:10.1177/1363461509102289.

  • Elliott C: Against happiness. Med Health Care Philos 2007, 10(2):167-171. doi:10.1007/s11019-007-9058-2.

  • Epstein AJ, Asch DA, Barry CL: Effects of conflict-of-interest policies in psychiatry residency on antidepressant prescribing. LDI Issue Brief 2013, 18(3):1-4.

  • Epstein AJ et al.: Does exposure to conflict of interest policies in psychiatry residency affect antidepressant prescribing? Med Care 2013, 51(2):199-203. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e318277eb19.

  • Farlow MR: Randomized clinical trial results for donepezil in Alzheimer's disease: is the treatment glass half full or half empty? J Am Geriatr Soc 2008, 56(8):1566-1567. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01853.x.

  • Fast J: When is a mental health clinic not a mental health clinic? drug trial abuses reach social work. Soc Work 2003, 48(3):425-427. doi: 10.1093/sw/48.3.425.

  • Filaković P, Degmecić D, Koić E, Benić D: Ethics of the early intervention in the treatment of schizophrenia. Psychiatr Danub 2007, 19(3):209-215.

  • Fisk JD: Ethical considerations for the conduct of antidementia trials in Canada. Can J Neurol Sci 2007, 34( Suppl 1):S32-S36. doi: 10.1017/S0317167100005539.

  • Flaskerud JH: American culture and neuro-cognitive enhancing drugs. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2010, 31(1):62-63. doi:10.3109/01612840903075395.

  • Fleischhacker WW et al.: Placebo or active control trials of antipsychotic drugs? Arch Gen Psychiatry 2003, 60(5): 458-464. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.5.458.

  • Francey SM: Who needs antipsychotic medication in the earliest stages of psychosis? a reconsideration of benefits, risks, neurobiology and ethics in the era of early intervention. Schizophr Res 2010, 119(1-3):1-10. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2010.02.1071.

  • Gardner P: Distorted packaging: marketing depression as illness, drugs as cure. J Med Humanit 2003, 24(1-2):105-130. doi: 10.1023/A:1021314017235.

  • Gauthier S, Leuzy A, Racine E, Rosa-Neto P: Diagnosis and management of Alzheimer's disease: past, present and future ethical issues. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110:102-113. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.01.003.

  • Gilstad JR, Finucane TE: Results, rhetoric, and randomized trials: the case of donepezil. J Am Geriatr Soc 2008, 56(8):1556-1562. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01844.x.

  • Gjertsen MK, von Mehren Saeterdal I, Thürmer H: Questionable criticism of the report on antidepressive agents. [Tvilsom kritikk av rapport om antidepressive legemidler] Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2008, 128(4):475.

  • Gold I, Olin L: From Descartes to desipramine: psychopharmacology and the self. Transcult Psychiatry 2009, 46(1):38-59. doi:10.1177/1363461509102286.

  • Greely H et al.: Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature 2008, 456(7223):702-705. doi:10.1038/456702a.

  • Gross DE: Presumed dangerous: California's selective policy of forcibly medicating state prisoners with antipsychotic drugs. Univ Calif Davis Law Rev 2002, 35:483-517.

  • Hamann J et al.: Do patients with schizophrenia wish to be involved in decisions about their medical treatment? Am Journal of Psychiatry, 162(12):2382-2384. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.162.12.2382.

  • Heinrichs DW: Antidepressants and the chaotic brain: implications for the respectful treatment of selves. Philos Psychiatr Psychol 2005, 12(3):215-227. doi: 10.1353/ppp.2006.0006.

  • Hellander M: Medication-induced mania: ethical issues and the need for more research. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 2003, 13(2):199. doi:10.1089/104454603322163916.

  • Herzberg D: Prescribing in an age of "wonder drugs." MD Advis 2011, 4(2):14-18.

  • Hoffman GA: Treating yourself as an object: self-objectification and the ethical dimensions of antidepressant use. Neuroethics 2013, 6(1):165-178. doi: 10.1007/s12152-012-9162-8.

  • Howe EG: Ethical challenges when patients have dementia. J Clin Ethics 2011, 22(3):203-211.

  • Hudson TJ et al.: Disparities in use of antipsychotic medications among nursing home residents in Arkansas. Psychiatr Serv 2005, 56(6):749-751. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.56.6.749.

  • Huf W et al.: Meta-analysis: fact or fiction? how to interpret meta-analyses. World J Biol Psychiatry 2011, 12(3):188-200. doi:10.3109/15622975.2010.551544.

  • Hughes JC: Quality of life in dementia: an ethical and philosophical perspective. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2003, 3(5):525-534. doi:10.1586/14737167.3.5.525.

  • Huizing AR, Berghmans RLP, Widdershoven GAM, Verhey FRJ: Do caregivers' experiences correspond with the concerns raised in the literature? ethical issues related to anti-dementia drugs. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2006, 21(9):869-875. doi: 10.1002/gps.1576.

  • Ihara H, Arai H: Ethical dilemma associated with the off-label use of antipsychotic drugs for the treatment of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. Psychogeriatrics 2008, 8(1):32-37. doi:10.1111/j.1479-8301.2007.00215.x.

  • Iliffe S: Thriving on challenge: NICE's dementia guidelines. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2007, 7(6):535-538. doi: 10.1586/14737167.7.6.535.

  • Ioannidis JP: Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials? Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2008, 3:14. doi: 10.1186/1747-5341-3-14.

  • Jacobs DH, Cohen D: The make-believe world of antidepressant randomized controlled trials -- an afterword to Cohen and Jacobs. Journal of Mind and Behavior 2010, 31(1-2):23-36.

  • Jakovljević M: New generation vs. first generation antipsychotics debate: pragmatic clinical trials and practice-based evidence. Psychiatr Danub 2009, 21(4):446-452.

  • Jotterand F: Psychopathy, neurotechnologies, and neuroethics. Theor Med Bioeth 2014, 35(1):1-6. doi:10.1007/s11017-014-9280-x.

  • Khan MM: Murky waters: the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatrists in developing countries. Psychiatr Bull 2006, 30(3):85-88.

  • Kim SY, Holloway RG: Burdens and benefits of placebos in antidepressant clinical trials: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Psychiatry 2003, 160(7):1272-1276. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.160.7.1272.

  • Kim SY, et al.: Preservation of the capacity to appoint a proxy decision maker: implications for dementia research. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011, 68(2):214-220. doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.191.

  • Kirsch I: The use of placebos in clinical trials and clinical practice. Can J Psychiatry 2011, 56(4):191-2.

  • Klemperer D: Drug research: marketing before evidence, sales before safety. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010, 107(16) 277-278. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2010.0277.

  • Leguay D et al.: Evolution of the social autonomy scale (EAS) in schizophrenic patients depending on their management. [Evolution de l'autonomie sociale chez des patients schizophrenes selon les prises en charge. L'etude ESPASS] Encephale 2010, 36(5):397-407. doi:10.1016/j.encep.2010.01.004.

  • Leibing A: The earlier the better: Alzheimer's prevention, early detection, and the quest for pharmacological interventions. Cult Med Psychiatry 2014, 38(2):217-236. doi:10.1007/s11013-014-9370-2.

  • Lisi D: Response to "results, rhetoric, and randomized trials: the case of donepezil". J Am Geriatr Soc 2009, 57(7):1317-8; doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02331.x.

  • McConnell S, Karlawish J, Vellas B, DeKosky S: Perspectives on assessing benefits and risks in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement 2006, 2(3):160-163. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2006.03.015.

  • McGlashan TH: Early detection and intervention in psychosis: an ethical paradigm shift. Br J Psychiatry Suppl 2005, 48:s113-s115. doi: 10.1192/bjp.187.48.s113.

  • McGoey L: Compounding risks to patients: selective disclosure is not an option. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(8):35-36. doi:10.1080/15265160902979798.

  • McGoey L, Jackson E: Seroxat and the suppression of clinical trial data: regulatory failure and the uses of legal ambiguity. J Med Ethics 2009, 35(2):107-112. doi:10.1136/jme.2008.025361.

  • McGoey L: Profitable failure: antidepressant drugs and the triumph of flawed experiments. Hist Human Sci 2010, 23(1):58-78. doi: 10.1177/0952695109352414.

  • McHenry L: Ethical issues in psychopharmacology. J Med Ethics 2006, 32(7):405-410. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.013185.

  • Meesters Y, Ruiter MJ, Nolen WA: Is it acceptable to use placebos in depression research? [Is het gebruik van placebo in onderzoek bij depressie aanvaardbaar?] Tijdschr Psychiatr 2010, 52(8):575-582.

  • Millán-González R: Consentimientos informados y aprobación por parte de los comités de ética en los estudios de antipsicóticos atípicos para el manejo del delírium [informed consent and the approval by ethics committees of studies involving the use of atypical antipsychotics in the management of delirium]. Rev Colomb Psiquiatr 2012, 41(1):150-164. doi: 10.1016/S0034-7450(14)60074-3.

  • Moller HJ: Are placebo-controlled studies required in order to prove efficacy of antidepressants? World J BiolPsychiatry 2005, 6(3):130-131. doi: 10.1080/15622970510030108.

  • Moncrieff J, Double D: Double blind random bluff. Ment Health Today 2003:24-26.

  • Morse SJ: Involuntary competence. Behav Sci Law 2003, 21(3):311-328. doi:10.1002/bsl.538.

  • Moskowitz DS: Quarrelsomeness in daily life. J Pers 2010, 78(1):39-66. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00608.x.

  • Moynihan R: Evening the score on sex drugs: feminist movement or marketing masquerade? BMJ 2014, 349:g6246. doi:10.1136/bmj.g6246.

  • Muller S: Body integrity identity disorder (BIID)--is the amputation of healthy limbs ethically justified? Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(1):36-43. doi:10.1080/15265160802588194.

  • Müller S, Walter H: Reviewing autonomy: implications of the neurosciences and the free will debate for the principle of respect for the patient's autonomy. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2010, 19(2):205-217. doi:10.1017/S0963180109990478.

  • Murtagh A, Murphy KC: Trial of risperidone in India--concerns. Br J Psychiatry 2006, 188:489. doi: 10.1192/bjp.188.5.489-a.

  • Naarding P, van Grevenstein M, Beekman AT: Benefit-risk analysis for the clinician: 'primum non nocere' revisited--the case for antipsychotics in the treatment of behavioural disturbances in dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2010, 25(5):437-440. doi:10.1002/gps.2357.

  • Newton J, Langlands A: Depressing misrepresentation? Lancet 2004, 363(9422):1732. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16262-4.

  • Olsen JM: Depression, SSRIs, and the supposed obligation to suffer mentally. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2006, 16(3):283-303. doi: 10.1353/ken.2006.0019.

  • Orfei MD, Caltagirone C, Spalletta G: Ethical perspectives on relations between industry and neuropsychiatric medicine. Int Rev Psychiatry 2010, 22(3):281-287. doi:10.3109/09540261.2010.484014.

  • Patel V: Ethics of placebo-controlled trial in severe mania. Indian J Med Ethics 2006, 3(1):11-12.

  • Perman E: Physicians report verbal drug information: cases scrutinized by the IGM [Lakare anmaler muntlig lakemedelsinformation. Arenden behandlade av IGM] Lakartidningen 2004, 101(35):2648, 2650.

  • Pitkälä K: When should the medication for dementia be stopped? [Milloin dementialaakityksen voi lopettaa?] Duodecim 2003, 119(9):817-818.

  • Poses RM: Efficacy of antidepressants and USPSTF guidelines for depression screening. Ann Intern Med 2010, 152(11):753. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00016.

  • Preda A: Shared decision making in schizophrenia treatment. J Clin Psychiatry 2008, 69(2):326.

  • Quinlan M: Forcible medication and personal autonomy: the case of Charles Thomas Sell. Spec Law Dig Health Care Law 2005, 311:9-33.

  • Ragan M, Kane CF: Meaningful lives: elders in treatment for depression. Arch Psychiatr Nurs 2010, 24(6):408-417. doi:10.1016/j.apnu.2010.04.002.

  • Rajna P: Living with lost individuality: special concerns in medical care of severely demented Alzheimer patients. [Elni az egyeniseg elvesztese utan. A sulyos Alzheimer-betegek orvosi ellatasanak sajatos szempontjai] Ideggyogy Sz 2010, 63(11-12):364-376.

  • Rasmussen-Torvik LJ, McAlpine DD: Genetic screening for SSRI drug response among those with major depression: great promise and unseen perils. Depress Anxiety 2007, 24(5):350-357. doi:10.1002/da.20251.

  • Raven M, Stuart GW, Jureidini J: ‘Prodromal’ diagnosis of psychosis: ethical problems in research and clinical practice. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2012, 46(1):64-65. doi:10.1177/0004867411428917.

  • Raz A et al.: Placebos in clinical practice: comparing attitudes, beliefs, and patterns of use between academic psychiatrists and nonpsychiatrists. Can J Psychiatry 2011, 56(4):198-208.

  • Reichlin M: The challenges of neuroethics. Funct Neurol 2007, 22(4):235-242.

  • Roberts LW, Geppert CM: Ethical use of long-acting medications in the treatment of severe and persistent mental illnesses. Compr Psychiatry 2004, 45(3):161-167. doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2004.02.003.

  • Roehr B: Professor files complaint of scientific misconduct over allegation of ghostwriting. BMJ 2011, 343:d4458. doi:10.1136/bmj.d4458.

  • Roehr B: Marketing of antipsychotic drugs targeted doctors of Medicaid patients, report says. BMJ 2012, 345:e6633. doi:10.1136/bmj.e6633.

  • Rose S: How smart are smart drugs? Lancet 2008, 372(9634):198-199. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61058-2.

  • Rose SP: ‘Smart drugs’: do they work? are they ethical? will they be legal? Nat Rev Neurosci 2002, 3(12):975-979. doi:10.1038/nrn984.

  • Rudnick A: Re: toward a Hippocratic psychopharmacology. Can J Psychiatry 2009, 54(6):426.

  • Schneider CE: Benumbed. Hastings Cent Rep 2004, 34(1):9-10.

  • Shivakumar G, Inrig S, Sadler JZ: Community, constituency, and morbidity: applying Chervenak and McCullough's criteria. Am J Bioeth 2011, 11(5):57-60. doi:10.1080/15265161.2011.578466.

  • Silverman BC, Gross AF: Weighing risks and benefits of prescribing antidepressants during pregnancy. Virtual Mentor 2013, 15(9):746-752. doi:10.1001/virtualmentor.2013.15.9.ecas1-1309.

  • Singer EA: The necessity and the value of placebo. Sci Eng Ethics 2004, 10(1):51-56. doi: 10.1007/s11948-004-0062-0.

  • Snyder M, Platt L: Substance use and brain reward mechanisms in older adults. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv 2013, 51(7):15-20. doi:10.3928/02793695-20130530-01.

  • Soderfeldt Y, Gross D: Information, consent and treatment of patients with Morgellons disease: an ethical perspective. Am J Clin Dermatol 2014, 15(2):71-76. doi:10.1007/s40257-014-0071-y.

  • Srinivasan S et al.: Trial of risperidone in India--concerns. Br J Psychiatry 2006, 188:489. doi:10.1192/bjp.188.5.489.

  • Steinert T: CUtLASS 1 - increasing disillusion about 2nd generation neuroleptics. [CUtLASS 1 - zunehmende ernuchterung bezuglich neuroleptika der 2. generation] Psychiatr Prax 2007, 34(5):255-257. doi:10.1055/s-2007-984998.

  • Steinert, T: Ethical attitudes towards involuntary admission and involuntary treatment of patients with schizophrenia. [ethische einstellungen zu zwangsunterbringung und -behandlung schizophrener patienten] Psychiatr Prax 2007, 34 (Suppl 2),S186-S190. doi:10.1055/s-2006-952003.

  • Steinert T, Kallert TW: Involuntary medication in psychiatry. [medikamentose zwangsbehandlung in der psychiatrie]. Psychiatr Prax 2006, 33(4):160-169. doi:10.1055/s-2005-867054.

  • Stroup S, Swartz M, Appelbaum P: Concealed medicines for people with schizophrenia: a U.S. perspective. Schizophr Bull 2002, 28(3):537-542. doi 10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a006961.

  • Svenaeus F: Do antidepressants affect the self? a phenomenological approach. Med Health Care Philos 2007, 10(2):153-166. doi:10.1007/s11019-007-9060-8.

  • Svenaeus F: The ethics of self-change: becoming oneself by way of antidepressants or psychotherapy? Med Health Care Philos 2009, 12(2):169-178. doi:10.1007/s11019-009-9190-2.

  • Synofzik M: Effective, indicated--and yet without benefit? the goals of dementia drug treatment and the well-being of the patient. [Wirksam, indiziert--und dennoch ohne nutzen? die ziele der medikamentosen demenz-behandlung und das wohlergehen des patienten] Z Gerontol Geriatr 2006, 39(4):301-307. doi:10.1007/s00391-006-0390-6.

  • Tashiro S, Yamada MM, Matsui K: Ethical issues of placebo-controlled studies in depression and a randomized withdrawal trial in Japan: case study in the ethics of mental health research. J Nerv Ment Dis 2012, 200(3):255-259. doi:10.1097/NMD.0b013e318247d24f.

  • Teboul E: Keeping 'em honest: the current crisis of confidence in antidepressants. J Clin Psychiatry 2011, 72(7):1015. doi:10.4088/JCP.11lr07111.

  • Terbeck S, Chesterman LP: Will there ever be a drug with no or negligible side effects? evidence from neuroscience. Neuroethics 2014, 7(2):189-194. doi:10.1007/s12152-013-9195-7.

  • Torrey EF: A question of disclosure. Psychiatr Serv 2008, 59(8):935. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.59.8.935.

  • Valverde MA. Un dilema bioético a propósito de los antipsicóticos [A bioethical dilemma regarding antipsychotics]. Revista De Bioética y Derecho 2010, 20:4-9.

  • Vincent NA: Restoring responsibility: promoting justice, therapy and reform through direct brain interventions. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2014, 8(1):21-42. doi:10.1007/s11572-012-9156-y.

  • Waller P: Dealing with uncertainty in drug safety: lessons for the future from sertindole. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003, 12(4):283-287. doi:10.1002/pds.849.

  • Waring DR: The antidepressant debate and the balanced placebo trial design: an ethical analysis. Int J Law Psychiatry 2008, 31(6):453-462. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.09.001.

  • Werner S: Physical activity for patients with dementia: respecting autonomy [bewegung bei menschen mit demenz: autonomie respektieren]. Pflege Z 2011, 64(4):205-206, 208-209.

  • Williams, KG: (2002). Involuntary antipsychotic treatment: legal and ethical issues. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2002, 59(22):2233-2237.

  • Wong JG, Poon Y, Hui EC: "I can put the medicine in his soup, doctor!" J Med Ethics 2005, 31(5):262-265. doi:10.1136/jme.2003.007336.

  • Yang A, Koo JY: Non-psychotic uses for anti-psychotics. J Drugs Dermatol 2004, 3(2):162-168.

  • Young SN: Acute tryptophan depletion in humans: a review of theoretical, practical and ethical aspects. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2013, 38(5):294-305. doi:10.1503/jpn.120209.

  • Zetterqvist AV, Mulinari S: Misleading advertising for antidepressants in Sweden: a failure of pharmaceutical industry self-regulation. PLoS One 2013, 8(5):e62609. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062609.

Books:
  • Biegler P: The Ethical Treatment of Depression: Autonomy Through Psychotherapy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2011.

  • Dworkin RW: Artificial Happiness: The Dark Side of the New Happy Class. New York: Carroll & Graf; 2006.

  • Medawar C, Hardon A: Medicines Out of Control? Antidepressants and the Conspiracy of Goodwill. The Netherlands: Aksant; 2004.

  • Miravalle J: The Drug, the Soul, and God: A Catholic Moral Perspective on Antidepressants. Scranton, Pa.: University of Scranton Press; 2010.

Book chapters:
  • Foddy B, Kahane G, Savulescu J: Practical neuropsychiatric ethics. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Psychiatry. Edited by K.W.M. Fulford, Martin Davies, Richard G.T. Gipps, George Graham, John Z. Sadler, Giovanni Stanghellini, and Tim Thornton. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014:1185-1201.

  • Stingl AI, Weiss SM: Beyond and before the label: the ecologies and agencies of ADHD. In Krankheitskonstruktionen und Krankheitstreiberei: Die Renaissance der soziologischen Psychiatriekritik. Edited by Michael Dellwing, Martin Harbusch. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2013:201-231.

Anti-anxiety agents:
  • Dhahan PS, Mir R: The benzodiazepine problem in primary care: the seriousness and solutions. Qual Prim Care 2005, 13(4): 221-224.

  • Donate-Bartfield E, Spellecty R, Shane NJ: Maximizing beneficence and autonomy: ethical support for the use of nonpharmacological methods for managing dental anxiety. J Am Coll Dent 2010, 77(3): 26-34.

  • Glass KC: Rebuttal to Dr. Streiner: can the “evil” in the “lesser of 2 evils” be justified in placebo-controlled trials? Can J Psychiatry 2008, 53(7): 433.

  • Gutheil TG: Reflections on ethical issues in psychopharmacology: an American perspective. Int J Law Psychiatry 2012, 35(5-6): 387-391. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.09.007.

  • Hofsø K, Coyer FM: Part 1. Chemical and physical restraints in the management of mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU: contributing factors. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2007, 23(5): 249-255. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2007.04.003.

  • Kaut KP: Psychopharmacology and mental health practice: an important alliance. J Ment Health Couns 2011, 33(3): 196-222. doi: 10.17744/mehc.33.3.u357803u508r4070.

  • King JH, Anderson SM: Therapeutic implications of pharmacotherapy: current trends and ethical issues. J Couns Dev 2004, 82(3): 329-336. doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6678.2004.tb00318.x.

  • Kirmayer LJ: Psychopharmacology in a globalizing world: the use of anti-depressants in Japan. Transcult Psychiatry 2002, 39(3): 295-322. doi: 10.1177/136346150203900302.

  • Klemperer D: Drug research: marketing before evidence, sales before safety. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010, 107(16): 277-278. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0277.

  • Kotzalidis G et al.: Ethical questions in human clinical psychopharmacology: should the focus be on placebo administration? J Psychopharmacol 2008, 22(6): 590-597. doi: 10.1177/0269881108089576.

  • Levy N, Clarke S: Neuroethics and psychiatry. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2008, 21(6): 568-571. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e3283126769.

  • Mohamed AD, Sahakian BJ: The ethics of elective psychopharmacology. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2012, 15(4): 559-571. doi: 10.1017/S146114571100037X.

  • Murray CE, Murray TL: The family pharm: an ethical consideration of psychopharmacology in couple and family counseling. Fam J Alex Va 2007, 15(1): 65-71. doi: 10.1177/1066480706294123.

  • Nierenberg AA et al.: Critical thinking about adverse drug effects: lessons from the psychology of risk and medical decision-making for clinical psychopharmacology. Psychother Psychosom 2008, 77(4): 201-208. doi: 10.1159/000126071.

  • Sabin JA, Daniels N, Teagarden JR: The perfect storm. Psychiatr Ann 2004, 34(2): 125-132. doi: 10.3928/0048-5713-20040201-10.

  • Schott G et al.: The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences. part 1: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on the findings, protocols, and quality of drug trials. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010, 107(16): 279-285. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0279.

  • Sprung CL et al.: End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study. JAMA 2003, 290(6): 790-797. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.6.790.

  • Sprung CL et al: Relieving suffering or intentionally hastening death: where do you draw the line? Crit Care Med 2008, 36(1): 8-13. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000295304.99946.58.

  • Streiner DL: The lesser of 2 evils: the ethics of placebo-controlled trials. Can J Psychiatry 2008, 53(7): 430-432.

  • Strous RD: Ethical considerations in clinical training, care and research in psychopharmacology. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2011, 14(3): 413-424. doi: 10.1017/S1461145710001112.

Books:
  • Tone A: The Age of Anxiety: A History of America’s Turbulent Affair with Tranquilizers. New York: Basic Books; 2009.

Analgesics (and pain medicine):
  • Atkinson TJ, Schatman ME, Fudin J: The damage done by the war on opioids: the pendulum has swung too far. J Pain Res 2014, 7: 265-268. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S65581.

  • Basta LL: Ethical issues in the management of geriatric cardiac patients: a hospital’s ethics committee decides to not give analgesics to a terminally ill patient to relieve her pain. Am J Geriatr Cardiol 2005, 14(3): 150-151. doi: 10.1111/j.1076-7460.2004.02724.x.

  • Benyamin RM, Datta S, Falco FJ: A perfect storm in interventional pain management: regulated, but unbalanced. Pain Physician 2010, 13(2):109-116.

  • Birnie KA et al.: A practical guide and perspectives on the use of experimental pain modalities with children and adolescents. Pain Manag 2014, 4(2):97-111. doi:10.2217/pmt.13.72.

  • Borasio GD et al.: Attitudes towards patient care at the end of life: a survey of directors of neurological departments. [Einstellungen zur Patientenbetreuung in der letzten Lebensphase Eine Umfrage bei neurologischen Chefarzten.] Nervenarzt, 2004, 75(12):1187-1193. doi:10.1007/s00115-004-1751-2.

  • Braude HD: Affecting the body and transforming desire: the treatment of suffering as the end of medicine. Philos Psychiatr Psychol 2012, 19(4): 265-278. doi:10.1353/ppp.2012.0048.

  • Braude H: Normativity unbound: liminality in palliative care ethics. Theor Med Bioeth 2012, 33(2): 107-122. doi:10.1007/s11017-011-9200-2.

  • Braude HD: Unraveling the knot of suffering: combining neurobiological and hermeneutical approaches. Philos Psychiatr Psychol 2012, 19(4): 291-294. doi: 10.1353/ppp.2012.0056.

  • Brennan PM, Whittle IR: Intrathecal baclofen therapy for neurological disorders: a sound knowledge base but many challenges remain. Br J Neurosurg 2008, 22(4): 508-519. doi:10.1080/02688690802233364.

  • Buchbinder M: Personhood diagnostics: personal attributes and clinical explanations of pain. Med Anthropol Q 2011, 25(4): 457-478. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1387.2011.01180.x.

  • Chaturvedi SK: Ethical dilemmas in palliative care in traditional developing societies, with special reference to the Indian setting. J Med Ethics 2008, 34(8): 611-615. doi:10.1136/jme.2006.018887.

  • Ciuffreda MC et al.: Rat experimental model of myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury: an ethical approach to set up the analgesic management of acute post-surgical pain. PloS One 2014, 9(4): e95913. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0095913.

  • Darnall BD, Schatman ME: Urine drug screening: opioid risks preclude complete patient autonomy. Pain Med 2014, 15(12): 2001-2002. doi:10.1111/pme.12604_4.

  • de la Fuente-Fernandez R: Placebo, efecto placebo y ensayos clinicos [Placebo, placebo effect and clinical trials]. Neurologia 2007, 22(2): 69-71.

  • Derbyshire SW: Foetal pain? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2010, 24(5): 647-655. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2010.02.013.

  • Douglas C, Kerridge I, Ankeny R: Managing intentions: the end-of-life administration of analgesics and sedatives, and the possibility of slow euthanasia. Bioethics 2008, 22(7): 388-396. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00661.x.

  • England JD, Franklin GM: Difficult decisions: managing chronic neuropathic pain with opioids. Continuum (Minneap Minn) 2012, 18(1): 181-184. doi:10.1212/01.CON.0000411547.51324.38.

  • Feen E: Continuous deep sedation: consistent with physician's role as healer. Am J Bioeth 2011, 11(6): 49-51. doi:10.1080/15265161.2011.578200.

  • Finkel AG: Conflict of interest or productive collaboration? the pharma: academic relationship and its implications for headache medicine. Headache 2006, 46(7): 1181-1185. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00508.x.

  • Franklin GM: Primum non nocere. Pain Med 2013, 14(5): 617-618. doi:10.1111/pme.12120_2.

  • Giordano J: Cassandra 's curse: interventional pain management, policy and preserving meaning against a market mentality. Pain Physician 2006, 9(3): 167-169.

  • Giordano J: Changing the practice of pain medicine writ large and small through identifying problems and establishing goals. Pain Physician 2006, 9(4): 283-285.

  • Giordano J, Schatman ME: A crisis in chronic pain care: an ethical analysis; part two: proposed structure and function of an ethics of pain medicine. Pain Physician 2008, 11(5): 589-595.

  • Giordano J, Schatman ME: A crisis in chronic pain care: an ethical analysis; part three: toward an integrative, multi-disciplinary pain medicine built around the needs of the patient. Pain Physician 2008, 11(6): 775-784.

  • Giordano J, Engebretson JC, Benedikter R: Culture, subjectivity, and the ethics of patient-centered pain care. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2009, 18(1): 47-56. doi:10.1017/S0963180108090087.

  • Giordano J, Schatman ME: An ethical analysis of crisis in chronic pain care: facts, issues and problems in pain medicine; part I. Pain Physician 2008, 11(4): 483-490.

  • Giordano J, Schatman ME, Hover G: Ethical insights to rapprochement in pain care: bringing stakeholders together in the best interest(s) of the patient. Pain Physician 2009, 12(4): E265-E75.

  • Giordano J: Ethics of, and in, pain medicine: constructs, content, and contexts of application. Pain Physician 2008, 11(4): 391-392.

  • Giordano J: Hospice, palliative care, and pain medicine: meeting the obligations of non-abandonment and preserving the personal dignity of terminally III patients. Del Med J 2006, 78(11): 419-422.

  • Giordano J: Moral agency in pain medicine: philosophy, practice and virtue. Pain Physician 2006, 9(1): 41-46.

  • Giordano J, Gomez CF, Harrison C: On the potential role for interventional pain management in palliative care. Pain Physician 2007, 10(3): 395-398.

  • Giordano J, Abramson K, Boswell MV: Pain assessment: subjectivity, objectivity, and the use of neurotechnology. Pain Physician 2010, 13(4): 305-315.

  • Giordano J, Boswell MV: Pain, placebo, and nocebo: epistemic, ethical, and practical issues. Pain Physician 2005, 8(4): 331-333.

  • Giordano J: Pain research: can paradigmatic expansion bridge the demands of medicine, scientific philosophy and ethics? Pain Physician 2004, 7(4): 407-410.

  • Giordano J, Benedikter R: The shifting architectonics of pain medicine: toward ethical realignment of scientific, medical and market values for the emerging global community--groundwork for policy. Pain Med 2011, 12(3): 406-414. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01055.x.

  • Giordano J: Techniques, technology and tekne: the ethical use of guidelines in the practice of interventional pain management. Pain Physician 2007, 10(1): 1-5.

  • Goy ER, Carter JH, Ganzini L: Parkinson disease at the end of life: caregiver perspectives. Neurology 2007, 69(6): 611-612. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000266665.82754.61.

  • Gupta A, Giordano J: On the nature, assessment, and treatment of fetal pain: neurobiological bases, pragmatic issues, and ethical concerns. Pain Physician 2007, 10(4): 525-532.

  • Hall JK, Boswell MV: Ethics, law, and pain management as a patient right. Pain Physician 2009, 12(3), 499-506.

  • Hofmeijer J et al. Appreciation of the informed consent procedure in a randomised trial of decompressive surgery for space occupying hemispheric infarction. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2007, 78(10):1124-1128. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2006.110726.

  • Hunsinger M et al.: Disclosure of authorship contributions in analgesic clinical trials and related publications: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations. Pain 2014, 155(6): 1059-1063. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2013.12.011.

  • Jacobson PL, Mann JD: Evolving role of the neurologist in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic noncancer pain. Mayo Clin Proc 2003, 78(1): 80-84. doi: 10.4065/78.1.80.

  • Jacobson PL, Mann JD: The valid informed consent-treatment contract in chronic non-cancer pain: its role in reducing barriers to effective pain management. Compr Ther 2004, 30(2): 101-104.

  • Jung B, Reidenberg MM: Physicians being deceived. Pain Med 2007, 8(5): 433-437. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00315.x.

  • Kotalik J: Controlling pain and reducing misuse of opioids: ethical considerations. Can Fam Physician 2012, 58(4): 381-385.

  • LeBourgeois HW 3rd, Foreman TA, Thompson JW Jr.: Novel cases: malingering by animal proxy. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2002, 30(4): 520-524.

  • Lebovits A: Physicians being deceived: whose responsibility? Pain Med 2007, 8(5): 441. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00337.x.

  • Lebovits A: On the impact of the "business" of pain medicine on patient care: an introduction. Pain Med 2011, 12(5): 761-762. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01111.x.

  • Leo RJ, Pristach CA, Streltzer J: Incorporating pain management training into the psychiatry residency curriculum. Acad Psychiatry 2003, 27(1):1-11. doi:10.1176/appi.ap.27.1.1.

  • Mancuso T, Burns J: Ethical concerns in the management of pain in the neonate. Paediatr Anaesth 2009, 19(10): 953-957. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9592.2009.03144.x.

  • McGrew M, Giordano J: Whence tendance? accepting the responsibility of care for the chronic pain patient. Pain Physician 2009, 12(3): 483-485.

  • Monroe TB, Herr KA, Mion LC, Cowan RL: Ethical and legal issues in pain research in cognitively impaired older adults. Int J Nurs Stud 2013, 50(9): 1283-1287. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.11.023.

  • Nagasako EM, Kalauokalani DA: Ethical aspects of placebo groups in pain trials: lessons from psychiatry. Neurology 2005, 65(12 Suppl 4): S59-S65. doi: 10.1212/WNL.65.12_suppl_4.S59.

  • Niebroj LT, Jadamus-Niebroj D, Giordano J: Toward a moral grounding of pain medicine: consideration of neuroscience, reverence, beneficence, and autonomy. Pain Physician 2008, 11(1): 7-12.

  • Novy DM, Ritter LM, McNeill J: A primer of ethical issues involving opioid therapy for chronic nonmalignant pain in a multidisciplinary setting. Pain Med 2009, 10(2): 356-363. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2008.00509.x.

  • Peppin J: Preserving beneficence. Pain Med 2013, 14(5): 619. doi:10.1111/pme.12120_3.

  • Petersen GL et al.: The magnitude of nocebo effects in pain: a meta-analysis. Pain 2014, 155(8): 1426-1434. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2014.04.016.

  • Rapoport AM: More on conflict of interest from a clinical professor of neurology in private practice at a headache center. Headache 2006, 46(6): 1020-1021. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00474_2.x.

  • Robbins NM, Chaiklang K, Supparatpinyo K: Undertreatment of pain in HIV+ adults in Thailand. J Pain Symptom Manage 2012, 45(6): 1061-1072. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.06.010.

  • Rowbotham MC: The impact of selective publication on clinical research in pain. Pain 2008, 140(3), 401-404. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2008.10.026.

  • Russell JA, Williams MA, Drogan O: Sedation for the imminently dying: survey results from the AAN ethics section. Neurology 2010, 74(16): 1303-1309. doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181d9edcb.

  • Schatman ME, Darnall BD: Among disparate views, scales tipped by the ethics of system integrity. Pain Med 2013, 14(11): 1629-1630. doi:10.1111/pme.12257_4.

  • Schatman ME, Darnall BD: Commentary and rapprochement. Pain Med 2013, 14(5): 619-620. doi:10.1111/pme.12120_4.

  • Schatman ME, Darnall BD: Ethical pain care in a complex case. Pain Med 2013, 14(6): 800-801. doi:10.1111/pme.12137_3.

  • Schatman ME, Darnall BD: A pendulum swings awry: seeking the middle ground on opioid prescribing for chronic non-cancer pain. Pain Med 2013, 14(5): 617. doi:10.1111/pme.12120.

  • Schatman ME, Darnall BD: A practical and ethical solution to the opioid scheduling conundrum. J Pain Res 2013, 7:1-3. doi:10.2147/JPR.S58148.

  • Schatman ME: The role of the health insurance industry in perpetuating suboptimal pain management. Pain Med 2011, 12(3): 415-426. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01061.x.

  • Schofferman J: Interventional pain medicine: financial success and ethical practice: an oxymoron? Pain Med 2006, 7(5): 457-460. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2006.00215_1.x.

  • Schofferman J: PRF: too good to be true? Pain Med 2006, 7(5): 395. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2006.00209.x.

  • Sullivan M, Ferrell B: Ethical challenges in the management of chronic nonmalignant pain: negotiating through the cloud of doubt. J Pain 2005, 6(1): 2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2004.10.006.

  • Tait RC, Chibnall JT: Racial/ethnic disparities in the assessment and treatment of pain: psychosocial perspectives. Am Psychol 2014, 69(2): 131-141. doi:10.1037/a0035204.

  • Tracey I: Getting the pain you expect: mechanisms of placebo, nocebo and reappraisal effects in humans. Nat Med 2010, 16(11): 1277-1283. doi:10.1038/nm.2229.

  • Verhagen AA et al.: Analgesics, sedative and neuromuscular blockers as part of end-of-life decisions in Dutch NICUs. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2009, 94(6): F434-F438. doi:10.1136/adc.2008.149260.

  • Williams MA, Rushton CH: Justified use of painful stimuli in the coma examination: a neurologic and ethical rationale. Neurocrit Care 2009, 10(3): 408-413. doi:10.1007/s12028-009-9196-x.

Books:
  • Braude HD: Intuition in Medicine: A Philosophical Defense of Clinical Reasoning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2012.

  • Giordano J: Pain: Mind, Meaning, and Medicine: Collected Essays on the Philosophical and Ethical Dimensions of Practical Pain Management. Glen Mills, PA: PPM Communications, Inc.; 2009.

  • Giordano J, Boswell MV, eds.: Pain Medicine: Philosophy, Ethics and Policy. Yarton, Oxon, UK and Chicago, IL: Linton Atlantic Books; 2009.

  • Goldberg DS: The Bioethics of Pain Management: Beyond Opioids. New York: Routledge; 2014.

  • Schatman ME: Ethical Issues in Chronic Pain Management. New York: Informa Healthcare; 2007.

Book chapters:
  • Ballantyne JC: Chronic opioid therapy: the argument for caution. In Ethical Issues in Chronic Pain Management. Edited by Michael E. Schatman. New York: Informa Healthcare; 2007:121-142.

  • Cole BE: Chronic opioid therapy: the argument for opioid therapy to treat persistent noncancer pain. In Ethical Issues in Chronic Pain Management. Edited by Michael E. Schatman. New York: Informa Healthcare; 2007: 111-120.

  • Schatman ME: The demise of the multidisciplinary chronic pain management clinic: bioethical perspectives on providing optimal treatment when ethical principles collide. In his Ethical Issues in Chronic Pain Management. New York: Informa Healthcare; 2007: 43-62.

  • Skinner A: Pain, ethics and research. In Pain Management: From Basics to Clinical Practice. Edited by John Hughes. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2008: 277-284.

Brain stimulation/Neuromodulation:

Neurofeedback:
  • Bakhshayesh AR, et al.: Neurofeedback in ADHD: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2011, 20(9): 481-491. doi:10.1007/s00787-011-0208-y.

  • Focquaert F: Mandatory neurotechnological treatment: ethical issues. Theor Med Bioeth 2014, 35(1): 59-72. doi:10.1007/s11017-014-9276-6.

  • Ford PJ, Henderson JM: The clinical and research ethics of neuromodulation. Neuromodulation 2006, 9(4): 250-252. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1403.2006.00076.x.

  • Gevensleben H, et al.: Neurofeedback for ADHD: further pieces of the puzzle. Brain Topogr 2014, 27(1): 20-32. doi:10.1007/s10548-013-0285-y.

  • Giordano J, DuRousseau D: Toward right and good use of brain-machine interfacing neurotechnologies: ethical issues and implications for guidelines and policy. Cog Technol 2011, 15(2):5-10.

  • Glannon W: Neuromodulation, agency and autonomy. Brain Topogr 2014, 27(1): 46-54. doi:10.1007/s10548-012-0269-3.

  • Hammond DC, et al.: Standards of practice for neurofeedback and neurotherapy: a position paper of the International Society for Neurofeedback & Research. J Neurother 2011, 15(1):54-64. doi: 10.1080/10874208.2010.545760.

  • Hammond DC, Kirk, L: First, do no harm: adverse effects and the need for practice standards in neurofeedback. J Neurother 2008, 12(1): 79-88. doi: 10.1080/10874200802219947.

  • Huggins JE, Wolpaw JR: Papers from the Fifth International Brain-computer Interface Meeting: preface. J Neural Eng 2014, 11(3): 030301. doi:10.1088/1741-2560/11/3/030301.

  • Huster RJ, Mokom ZN, Enriquez-Geppert S, Herrmann CS: Brain-computer interfaces for EEG neurofeedback: peculiarities and solutions. Int J Psychophysiol 2014, 91(1): 36-45. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.08.011.

  • Levy RM: Ethical issues in neuromodulation. Neuromodulation 2010, 13(3):147-151. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1403.2010.00281.x.

  • Mandarelli G, Moscati FM, Venturini P, Ferracuti S: Informed consent and neuromodulation techniques for psychiatric purposes: an introduction. [Il consenso informato e gli interventi di neuromodulazione chirurgica in psichiatria: un'introduzione]. Riv Psichiatr 2013, 48(4): 285-292. doi:10.1708/1319.14624.

  • Maurizio S, et al.: Differential EMG biofeedback for children with ADHD: a control method for neurofeedback training with a case illustration. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 2013, 38(2) 109-119. doi:10.1007/s10484-013-9213-x.

  • Micoulaud-Franchi JA, Fond G, Dumas G: Cyborg psychiatry to ensure agency and autonomy in mental disorders: a proposal for neuromodulation therapeutics. Front Hum Neurosci 2013, 7: 463. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00463.

  • Myers JE, Young JS: Brain wave biofeedback: benefits of integrating neurofeedback in counseling. J Couns Dev 2012, 90(1): 20-28. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-6676.2012.00003.x.

  • Plischke H, DuRousseau D, Giordano J: EEG-based neurofeedback: the promise of neurotechnology and the need for neuroethically informed guidelines and policies. Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine: An International Journal 2011, 2(3):221-232. doi:10.1615/EthicsBiologyEngMed.2012004853.

  • Rothenberger A, Rothenberger LG: Updates on treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: facts, comments, and ethical considerations. Curr Treat Options Neurol 2012, 14(6):594-607. doi:10.1007/s11940-012-0197-2.

  • Rusconi E, Mitchener-Nissen T: The role of expectations, hype and ethics in neuroimaging and neuromodulation futures. Front Syst Neurosci 2014, 8:214. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00214.

  • Vuilleumier P, Sander D, Baertschi B: Changing the brain, changing the society: clinical and ethical implications of neuromodulation techniques in neurology and psychiatry. Brain Topogr 2014, 27(1):1-3. doi:10.1007/s10548-013-0325-7.

Book chapters:
  • Hammond DC: Definitions, standard of care, and ethical considerations. In Clinical Neurotherapy: Application of Techniques for Treatment. Edited by David S. Cantor, James R. Evans. London: Elsevier; 2014: 1-18.

  • Linden D: Ethics of neurofeedback. In his Brain Control: Developments in Therapy and Implications for Society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2014: 167.

  • Striefel S: Ethics in neurofeedback practice. In Introduction to Quantitative EEG and Neurofeedback: Advanced Theory and Applications. Edited by Thomas H. Budzynski et al. Amsterdam; Boston: Elsevier; 2009: 475-492.

Transcranial Electrical Stimulation/Magnetic Stimulation (tDCS, tACS, TMS):
  • Bestmann S, Feredoes E: Combined neurostimulation and neuroimaging in cognitive neuroscience: past, present, and future. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2013, 1296:11-30. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12110.

  • Brunelin J, Levasseur-Moreau J, Fecteau S: Is it ethical and safe to use non-invasive brain stimulation as a cognitive and motor enhancer device for military services? a reply to Sehm and Ragert. Front HumNeurosci 2013, 7: 874. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00874.

  • Brunoni AR et al.: Clinical research with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): challenges and future directions. Brain Stim 2012, 5(3): 175-195. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2011.03.002.

  • Cabrera LY, Evans EL, Hamilton RH: Ethics of the electrified mind: defining issues and perspectives on the principled use of brain stimulation in medical research and clinical care. Brain Topogr 2014, 27(1): 33-45. doi:10.1007/s10548-013-0296-8.

  • Cherney LR et al.: Transcranial direct current stimulation and aphasia: the case of Mr. C. Top Stroke Rehabil 2013, 20(1):5-21. doi:10.1310/tsr2001-5.

  • Chi RP, Snyder AW: Facilitate insight by non-invasive brain stimulation. PloS One 2011, 6(2): e16655. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016655.

  • Cohen Kadosh R et al.: The neuroethics of non-invasive brain stimulation. Curr Biol 2012, 22(4):R108-R111. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.01.013.

  • Coman A, Skarderud F, Reas DL, Hofmann BM: The ethics of neuromodulation for anorexia nervosa: a focus on tRMS. J Eat Disord 2014, 2(1):10. doi: 10.1186/2050-2974-2-10.

  • Davis NJ, Gold E, Pascual-Leone A, Bracewell RM: Challenges of proper placebo control for non-invasive brain stimulation in clinical and experimental applications. Eur J Neurosci 2013, 38(7):2973-2977. doi:10.1111/ejn.12307.

  • Davis NJ: Transcranial stimulation of the developing brain: a plea for extreme caution. Front Hum Neurosci 2014, 8:600. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00600.

  • Davis NJ, van Koningsbruggen MG: "Non-invasive" brain stimulation is not non-invasive. Front Syst Neurosci 2013, 7:76. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2013.00076.

  • Dranseika V, Gefenas E, Noreika S: The map of neuroethics. Problemos 2009, 76:66-73.

  • Dubljević V, Saigle V, Racine E: The rising tide of tDCS in the media and academic literature. Neuron 2014, 82(4):731-736. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.003.

  • Gilbert DL et al.: Should transcranial magnetic stimulation research in children be considered minimal risk? Clin Neurophysiol 2004, 115(8): 1730-1739. 10.1016/j.clinph.2003.10.037.

  • Heinrichs JH: The promises and perils of non-invasive brain stimulation. Int J Law Psychiatry 2012, 35(2): 121-129. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2011.12.006.

  • Horng SH, Miller FG: Placebo-controlled procedural trials for neurological conditions. Neurotherapeutics 2007, 4(3): 531-536. doi: 10.1016/j.nurt.2007.03.001.

  • Horvath JC, Carter O, Forte JD: Transcranial direct current stimulation: five important issues we aren't discussing (but probably should be). Front Syst Neurosci 2014, 8: 2. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00002.

  • Horvath JC et al.: Transcranial magnetic stimulation: a historical evaluation and future prognosis of therapeutically relevant ethical concerns. J Med Ethics 2011, 37(3): 137-143. doi:10.1136/jme.2010.039966.

  • Illes J, Gallo M, Kirschen MP: An ethics perspective on transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and human neuromodulation. Behav Neurol 2006, 17(3-4): 3-4. doi: 10.1155/2006/791072.

  • Johnson MD et al.: Neuromodulation for brain disorders: challenges and opportunities. IEEE Trans Biomed.Eng 2013, 60(3): 610-624. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2013.2244890.

  • Jones LS: The ethics of transcranial magnetic stimulation. Science 2007, 315(5819):1663-1664. doi: 10.1126/science.315.5819.1663c.

  • Jorge RE, Robinson RG: Treatment of late-life depression: a role of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques. Int Rev Psychiatry 2011, 23(5): 437-444. doi:10.3109/09540261.2011.633501.

  • Jotterand F, Giordano J: Transcranial magnetic stimulation, deep brain stimulation and personal identity: ethical questions, and neuroethical approaches for medical practice. Int Rev Psychiatry 2011, 23(5): 476-485. doi: 10.3109/09540261.2011.616189.2011.616189.

  • Karim AA: Transcranial cortex stimulation as a novel approach for probing the neurobiology of dreams: clinical and neuroethical implications. IJODR 2010, 3(1): 17-20. doi: 10.11588/ijodr.2010.1.593.

  • Keiper A: The age of neuroelectronics. New Atlantis 2006, 11:4-41.

  • Knoch D et al.: Diminishing reciprocal fairness by disrupting the right prefrontal cortex. Science 2006, 314(5800): 829-832. doi: 10.1126/science.1129156.

  • Krause B, Cohen Kadosh R: Can transcranial electrical stimulation improve learning difficulties in atypical brain development? a future possibility for cognitive training. Dev Cogn Neurosci 2013, 6: 176-194. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2013.04.001.

  • Levasseur-Moreau J, Brunelin J, Fecteau S: Non-invasive brain stimulation can induce paradoxical facilitation: are these neuroenhancements transferable and meaningful to security services? Front HumNeurosci 2013, 7: 449. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00449.

  • Levy N: Autonomy is (largely) irrelevant. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(1): 50-51. doi: 10.1080/15265160802588228.

  • Luber B et al.: Non-invasive brain stimulation in the detection of deception: scientific challenges and ethical consequences. Behav Sci Law 2009, 27(2):191-208. doi:10.1002/bsl.860.

  • Najib U, Horvath JC: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) safety considerations and recommendations. Neuromethods 2014, 89: 15-30. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0879-0_2.

  • Nitsche MA, et al.: Safety criteria for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in humans. Clin Neurophysiol 2003, 114(11): 2220-2222. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00235-9.

  • Nyffeler T, Müri R: Comment on: safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research, by Rossi et al. Clin Neurophysiol 2010, 121(6): 980. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2010.04.001.

  • Reiner PB: Comment on "can transcranial electrical stimulation improve learning difficulties in atypical brain development? a future possibility for cognitive training" by Krause and Cohen Kadosh. Dev Cogn Neurosci 2013, 6: 195-196. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2013.05.002.

  • Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A, Safety of TMS Consensus Group: Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol 2009, 120(12): 2008-2039. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016.

  • Schutter DJLG, van Honk J, Panksepp J: Introducing transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and its property of causal inference in investigating brain-function relationships. Synthese 2004, 141(2):155-173. doi: 10.1023/B:SYNT.0000042951.25087.16.

  • Sehm B, Ragert P: Why non-invasive brain stimulation should not be used in military and security services. Front Hum Neurosci 2013, 7:553. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00553.

  • Shamoo AE: Ethical and regulatory challenges in psychophysiology and neuroscience-based technology for determining behavior. Account Res 2010, 17(1): 8-29. doi: 10.1080/08989620903520271.

  • Shirota Y, Hewitt M, Paulus W: Neuroscientists do not use non-invasive brain stimulation on themselves for neural enhancement. Brain Stimul 2014, 7(4): 618-619. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2014.01.061.

  • Widdows KC, Davis NJ: Ethical considerations in using brain stimulation to treat eating disorders. Front Behav Neurosci 2014, 8: 351. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00351.

  • Williams NR, et al.: Interventional psychiatry: how should psychiatric educators incorporate neuromodulation into training? Acad Psychiatry 2014, 38(2): 168-176. doi: 10.1007/s40596-014-0050-x.

Book chapters:
  • Ganis G, Rosenfeld JP: Neural correlates of deception. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 101–118.

  • Green RM: Ethical issues. In Handbook of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. Edited by Alvaro Pascual-Leone. London: Arnold, and New York: Oxford University Press; 2002: 50–56.

  • Horvath J et al.: Transcranial magnetic stimulation: future prospects and ethical concerns in treatment and research. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012: 209–234.

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Transcranial brain stimulation. In its Novel Neurotechnologies: Intervening in the Brain. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics; 2013: 16–22.

  • Pascual-Leone A, Fregni F, Steven-Wheeler MS, Forrow L: Non-invasive brain stimulation as a therapeutic and investigative tool: an ethical appraisal. In The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes, Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 417–440.

  • Steven MS, Pascual-Leone A: Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the human brain: an ethical evaluation. In Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice, and Policy. Edited by Judy Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006: 201–211.

Deep brain stimulation:
  • Arends M, Fangerau H, Winterer G: [“Psychosurgery” and deep brain stimulation with psychiatric indication: current and historical aspects]. Nervenarzt 2009, 80(7): 781-788. doi: 1007/s00115-009-2726-0.

  • Baylis F: “I am who I am”: on the perceived threats to personal identity from deep brain stimulation. Neuroethics 2013, 6: 513-526. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9137-1.

  • Bell E, Mathieu G, Racine E: Preparing the ethical future of deep brain stimulation. Surg Neurol 2009, 72(6): 577-586. doi: 10.1016/j.surneu.2009.03.029.

  • Bell E et al.: A review of social and relational aspects of deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease informed by healthcare provider experiences. Parkinsons Dis 2011, 2011:871874. doi: 10.4061/2011/871874.

  • Bell E et al.: Deep brain stimulation and ethics: perspectives from a multisite qualitative study of Canadian neurosurgical centers. World Neurosurg 2011, 76(6): 537-547. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2011.05.033.

  • Bell E et al.: Hope and patients’ expectations in deep brain stimulation: healthcare providers’ perspectives and approaches. J Clin Ethics 2010, 21(2): 112-124.

  • Bell E, Racine E: Deep brain stimulation, ethics, and society. J Clin Ethics 2010, 21(2): 101-103.

  • Bell E, Racine E: Clinical and ethical dimensions of an innovative approach for treating mental illness: a qualitative study of health care trainee perspectives on deep brain stimulation. Can J Neurosci Nurs 2013, 35(3): 23-32.

  • Bell E, Racine E: Ethics guidance for neurological and psychiatric deep brain stimulation. Handb Clin Neurol 2013, 116: 313-325. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53497-2.00026-7.

  • Bell E et al.: Beyond consent in research: revisiting vulnerability in deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disorders. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2014, 23(3): 361-368. doi: 10.1017/S0963180113000984.

  • Canavero S: Halfway technology for the vegetative state. Arch Neurol 2010, 67(6): 777. doi: 10.1001/archneurol.2010.102.

  • Christen M, Müller S: Current status and future challenges of deep brain stimulation in Switzerland. Swiss Med Wkly 2012, 142: w13570. doi: 10.4414/smw.2012.13570.

  • Clausen J: Ethical brain stimulation- neuroethics of deep brain stimulation in research and clinical practice. Eur J Neurosci 2010, 32(7): 1152-1162. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2010.07421.x.

  • de Zwaan M, Schlaepfer TE: Not too much reason for excitement: deep brain stimulation for anorexia nervosa. Eur Eat Disord Rev 2013, 21(6): 509-511. doi: 10.1002/erv.2258.

  • Dunn LB et al.: Ethical issues in deep brain stimulation research for treatment-resistant depression: focus on risk and consent. AJOB Neurosci 2011, 2(1): 29-36. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2010.533638.

  • Erickson-Davis C: Ethical concerns regarding commercialization of deep brain stimulation for obsessive compulsive disorder. Bioethics 2012, 26(8): 440-446. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01886.x.

  • Farris S, Ford P, DeMarco J, Giroux ML: Deep brain stimulation and the ethics of protection and caring for the patient with Parkinson’s dementia. Mov Disord 2008, 23(14): 1973-1976. doi: 10.1002/mds.22244.

  • Finns JJ: Neuromodulation, free will and determinism: lessons from the psychosurgery debate. Clin Neurosci Res 2004, 4(1/2): 113-118. doi: 10.1016/j.cnr.2004.06.011.

  • Finns JJ et al.: Misuse of the FDA’s humanitarian device exemption in deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder. Health Aff (Millwood) 2011, 30(2): 302-311. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0157.

  • Finns JJ, Schiff ND: Conflicts of interest in deep brain stimulation research and the ethics of transparency. J Clin Ethics 2010, 21(2): 125-132.

  • Finns JJ et al.: Ethical guidance for the management of conflicts of interest for researchers, engineers and clinicians engaged in the development of therapeutic deep brain stimulation. J Neural Eng 2011, 8(3): 033001. doi: 10.1088/1741-2560/8/3/033001.

  • Giacino J, Finns JJ, Machado A, Schiff ND: Central thalamic deep brain stimulation to promote recovery from chronic posttraumatic minimally conscious state: challenges and opportunities. Neuromodulation 2012, 15(4): 339-349. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1403.2012.00458.x.

  • Gilbert F: The burden of normality: from ‘chronically ill’ to ‘symptom free’: new ethical challenges for deep brain stimulation postoperative treatment. J Med Ethics 2012, 38(7): 408-412. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100044.

  • Gilbert F, Ovadia D: Deep brain stimulation in the media: over-optimistic portrayals call for a new strategy involving journalists and scientists in ethical debates. Front Integr Neurosci 2011, 5:16. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2011.00016.

  • Glannon W: Consent to deep brain stimulation for neurological and psychiatric disorders. J Clin Ethics 2010, 21(2): 104-111.

  • Glannon W: Deep-brain stimulation for depression. HEC Forum 2008, 20(4): 325-335. doi: 10.1007/s10730-008-9084-3.

  • Goldberg DS: Justice, population health, and deep brain stimulation: the interplay of inequities and novel health technologies. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(1): 16-20. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2011.635626.

  • Grant RA et al.: Ethical considerations in deep brain stimulation for psychiatric illness. J Clin Neurosci 2014, 21(1): 1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2013.04.004.

  • Hariz MI, Blomstedt P, Zrinzo L: Deep brain stimulation between 1947 and 1987: the untold story. Neurosurg Focus 2010, 29(2): E1. doi: 10.3171/2010.4.FOCUS10106.

  • Hinterhuber H: [Deep brain stimulation-new indications and ethical implications]. Neuropsychiatr 2009, 23(3): 139-143.

  • Hubbeling D: Registering findings from deep brain stimulation. JAMA 2010, 303(21): 2139-2140. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.705.

  • Illes J. Deep brain stimulation: paradoxes and a plea. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(1): 65-70. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2011.635629.

  • Johansson V et al.: Thinking ahead on deep brain stimulation: an analysis of the ethical implications of a developing technology. AJOB Neurosci 2014, 5(1): 24-33. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.863243.

  • Jotterand F, Giordano J: Transcranial magnetic stimulation, deep brain stimulation and personal identity: ethical questions, and neuroethical approaches for medical practice. Int Rev Psychiatry 2011, 23(5): 476-485. doi: 10.3109/09540261.2011.616189.2011.616189.

  • Katayama Y, Fukaya C: [Deep brain stimulation and neuroethics]. Brain Nerve 2009, 61(1): 27-32.

  • Klaming L, Haselager P: Did my brain implant make me do it? questions raised by DBS regarding psychological continuity, responsibility for action and mental competence. Neuroethics 2013, 6: 527-539. doi: 10.1007/s12152-010-9093-1.

  • Kraemer F: Authenticity or autonomy: when deep brain stimulation causes a dilemma. J Med Ethics 2013, 39(12): 757-760. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100427.

  • Kraemer F: Me, myself and my brain implant: deep brain stimulation raises questions of personal authenticity and alienation. Neuroethics 2013, 6: 483-497. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9115-7.

  • Kringelbach ML, Aziz TZ: Deep brain stimulation: avoiding the errors of psychosurgery. JAMA 2009, 301(16): 1705-1707. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.551.

  • Kringelbach ML, Aziz TZ: Neuroethical principles of deep-brain stimulation. World Neurosurg 2011, 76(6): 518-519. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2011.06.042.

  • Krug H, Müller O, Bittner U: [Technological intervention in the self? an ethical evaluation of deep brain stimulation relating to patient narratives]. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 2010, 78(11): 644-651. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1245753.

  • Kubu CS, Ford PJ: Beyond mere symptom relief in deep brain stimulation: an ethical obligation for multi-faceted assessment of outcome. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(1): 44-49. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2011.633960.

  • Kuhn J, Gaebel W, Klosterkoetter J, Woopen C: Deep brain stimulation as a new therapeutic approach in therapy-resistant mental disorders: ethical aspects of investigational treatment. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2009, 259(Suppl 2): S135-S141. doi: 10.1007/s00406-009-0055-8.

  • Kuhn J et al.: Deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disorders. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010, 107(7): 105-113. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0105.

  • Lipsman N, Giacobbe P, Bernstein M, Lozano AM: Informed consent for clinical trials of deep brain stimulation in psychiatric disease: challenges and implications for trial design. J Med Ethics 2012, 38(2): 107-111. doi: 10.1136/jme.2010.042002.

  • Lipsman N, Glannon W: Brain, mind and machine: what are the implications of deep brain stimulation for perceptions of personal identity, agency and free will? Bioethics 2013, 27(9): 465-470. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01978.x.

  • Mandarelli G, Moscati FM, Venturini P, Ferracuti S: [Informed consent and neuromodulation techniques for psychiatric purposes: an introduction]. Riv Psichiatr 2013, 48(4): 285-292. doi: 10.1708/1319.14624.

  • Mathews DJ: Deep brain stimulation, personal identity and policy. Int Rev Psychiatry 2011, 23(5):486-492. doi:10.3109/09540261.2011.632624.

  • Mendelsohn D, Lipsman N, Bernstein M: Neurosurgeons’ perspectives on psychosurgery and neuroenhancement: a qualitative study at one center. J Neurosurg 2010, 113(6): 1212-1218. doi: 10.3171/2010.5.JNS091896.

  • Meyer FP: Re: deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disorders: topic for ethics committee. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010, 107(37): 644. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0644b.

  • Müller UJ et al.: [Deep brain stimulation in psychiatry: ethical aspects]. Psychiatr Prax 2014, 41(Suppl 1): S38-S43. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1370015.

  • Müller S, Walter H, Christen M: When benefitting a patient increases the risk for harm for third persons- the case of treating pedophilic Parkinsonian patients with deep brain stimulation. Int J Law Psychiatry 2014, 37(3): 295-303. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2013.11.015.

  • Oshima H, Katayama Y: Neuroethics of deep brain stimulation for mental disorders: brain stimulation reward in humans. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2010, 50(9): 845-852. doi: 10.2176/nmc.50.845.

  • Pacholczyk A: DBS makes you feel good! –why some of the ethical objections to the use of DBS for neuropsychiatric disorders and enhancement are not convincing. Front Integr Neurosci 2011, 5: 14. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2011.00014.

  • Patuzzo S, Manganotti P: Deep brain stimulation in persistent vegetative states: ethical issues governing decision making. Behav Neurol 2014, 2014: 641213. doi: 10.1155/2014/641213.

  • Racine E, Bell E: Responding ethically to patient and public expectations about psychiatric DBS. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(1): 21-29. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2011.633959.

  • Racine E et al.: “Currents of hope”: neurostimulation techniques in U.S. and U.K. print media. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(3): 312-316. doi: 10.1017/S0963180107070351.

  • Rabins P et al.: Scientific and ethical issues related to deep brain stimulation for disorders of mood, behavior, and thought. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2009, 66(9): 931-937. doi: 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.113.

  • Rossi PJ, Okun M, Giordano J: Translational imperatives in deep brain stimulation research: addressing neuroethical issues of consequences and continuity of clinical care. AJOB Neurosci 2014, 5(1): 46-48. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2013.863248.

  • Schermer M: Ethical issues in deep brain stimulation. Front Integr Neurosci 2011, 5:17. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2011.00017.

  • Schermer M: Health, happiness and human enhancementdealing with unexpected effects of deep brain stimulation. Neuroethics 2013, 6: 435-445. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9097-5.

  • Schiff ND, Giacino JT, Fins JJ: Deep brain stimulation, neuroethics, and the minimally conscious state: moving beyond proof of principle. Arch Neurol 2009, 66(6): 697-702. doi: 10.1001/archneurol.2009.79.

  • Schlaepfer TE: Toward an emergent consensusinternational perspectives on neuroethics of deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disordersa Tower of Babel? AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(1): 1-3. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.646914.

  • Schlaepfer TE, Fins JJ: Deep brain stimulation and the neuroethics of responsible publishing: when one is not enough. JAMA 2010, 303(8): 775-776. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.140.

  • Schlaepfer TE, Lisanby SH, Pallanti S: Separating hope from hype: some ethical implications of the development of deep brain stimulation in psychiatric research and treatment. CNS Spectr 2010, 15(5): 285-287. doi: 10.1017/S1092852900027504.

  • Schmetz MK, Heinemann T: [Ethical aspects of deep brain stimulation in the treatment of psychiatric disorders]. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 2010, 78(5): 269-278. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1245208.

  • Schmitz-Luhn B, Katzenmeier C, Woopen C: Law and ethics of deep brain stimulation. Int J Law Psychiatry 2012, 35(2): 130-136. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2011.12.007.

  • Sen AN et al.: Deep brain stimulation in the management of disorders of consciousness: a review of physiology, previous reports, and ethical considerations. Neurosurg Focus 2010, 29(2): E14. doi: 10.3171/2010.4.FOCUS1096.

  • Sharifi MS: Treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders with deep brain stimulation: raising hopes and future challenges. Basic Clin Neurosci 2013, 4(3): 266-270.

  • Skuban T, Hardenacke K, Woopen C, Kuhn J: Informed consent in deep brain stimulationethical considerations in a stress field of pride and prejudice. Front Integr Neurosci 2011, 5:7. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2011.00007.

  • Synofzik M: [Intervening in the neural basis of one’s personality: a practice-oriented ethical analysis of neuropharmacology and deep-brain stimulation]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007, 132(50): 2711-2713. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-993124.

  • Synofzik M: [New indications for deep brain stimulation: ethical criteria for research and therapy]. Nervenarzt 2013, 84(10): 1175-1182. doi: 10.1007/s00115-013-3733-8.

  • Synofzik M, Schlaepfer TE: Electrodes in the brain—ethical criteria for research and treatment with deep brain stimulation for neuropsychiatric disorders. Brain Stimul 2011, 4(1): 7-16. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2010.03.002.

  • Synofzik M, Schlaepfer TE: Stimulating personality: ethical criteria for deep brain stimulation in psychiatric patients and for enhancement purposes. Biotechnol J 2008, 3(12): 1511-1520. doi: 10.1002/biot.200800187.

  • Synofzik M, Schlaepfer TE, Fins JJ: How happy is too happy? euphoria, neuroethics, and deep brain stimulation of the nucleus accumbens. AJOB Neurosci 2012, 3(1): 30-36. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2011.635633.

  • Takagi M: [Safety and neuroethical consideration of deep brain stimulation as a psychiatric treatment]. Brain Nerve 2009, 61(1): 33-40.

  • Weisleder P: Individual justice or societal injustice. Arch Neurol 2010, 67(6): 777-778. doi: 10.1001/archneurol.2010.103.

  • Wind JJ, Anderson DE: From prefrontal leukotomy to deep brain stimulation: the historical transformation of psychosurgery and the emergence of neuroethics. Neurosurg Focus 2008, 25(1): E10. doi: 10.3171/FOC/2008/25/7/E10.

  • Witt K et al.: Deep brain stimulation and the search for identity. Neuroethics 2013, 6: 499-511. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9100-1.

  • Woopen C: Ethical aspects of neuromodulation. Int Rev Neurobiol 2012, 107: 315-332. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-404706-8.00016-4.

  • Woopen C et al.: Early application of deep brain stimulation: clinical and ethical aspects. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110: 74-88. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.04.002.

Books:
  • Fangerau H, Fegert J, Trapp T: Implanted Minds: The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag; 2011.

Book chapters:
  • Ackerman S: Ethical and practical concerns of deep brain stimulation. In her Hard Science, Hard Choices: Facts, Ethics and Policies Guiding Brain Science Today. New York: Dana Press; 2006: 100-102.

  • Blank RH: Brain intervention: state of the art. In his Intervention in the Brain: Politics, Policy, and Ethics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2013: 25-63.

  • Bell E, Racine E: Ethics guidance for neurological and psychiatric deep brain stimulation. In Brain Stimulation: Handbook of Clinical Neurology. Edited by A.M. Lozano, Mark Hallett. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2013: 313-328.

  • Green AL, Pereira EAC, Aziz TZ: Deep brain stimulation and pleasure. In Pleasures of the Brain. Edited by Morten L. Kringelback and Kent C. Berridge. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010: 302-319.

  • Matthews DJH, Rabins PV, Greenberg BD: Deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant neuropsychiatric disorders. In Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 441-454.

  • Synofzik M: Functional neurosurgery and deep brain stimulation. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013: 189-208.

Brain-machine interfaces:
  • Baranauskas G: What limits the performance of current invasive brain machine interfaces? Front Syst Neurosci 2014, 8:68. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00068.

  • Carmichael C, Carmichael P: BNCI systems as a potential assistive technology: ethical issues and participatory research in the BrainAble project. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014, 9(1): 41-47. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2013.867372.

  • Clausen J: Bonding brains to machines: ethical implications of electroceuticals for the human brain. Neuroethics 2013, 6(3): 429-434. doi: 10.1007/s12152-013-9186-8.

  • Clausen J: Conceptual and ethical issues with brain-hardware interfaces. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2011, 24(6): 495-501. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834bb8ca.

  • Clausen J: Moving minds: ethical aspects of neural motor prostheses. Biotechnol J 2008, 3(12): 1493-1501. doi: 10.1002/ciot.200800244.

  • Demetriades AK, Demetriades CK, Watts C, Ashkan K: Brain-machine interface: the challenge of neuroethics. Surgeon 2010, 8(5): 267-269. doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2010.05.006.

  • Farah MJ, Wolpe PR: Monitoring and manipulating brain function: new neuroscience technologies and their ethical implications. Hastings Cent Rep 2004, 34(3): 35-45. doi: 10.2307/3528418.

  • Grübler G: Beyond the responsibility gap: discussion note on responsibility and liability in the use of brain-computer interfaces. AI Soc 2011, 26:377-382. doi: 10.1007/s00146-011-0321-y.

  • Hansson SO: Implant ethics. J Med Ethics 2005, 31(9): 519-525. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.009803.

  • Heersmink R: Embodied tools, cognitive tools and brain-computer interfaces. Neuroethics 2013, 6(1): 207-219. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9136-2.

  • Jebari K: Brain machine interface and human enhancement – an ethical review. Neuroethics 2013, 6(3): 617-625. doi: 10.1007/s12152-012-9176-2.

  • Jebari K, Hansson SO: European public deliberation on brain machine interface technology: five convergence seminars. Sci Eng Ethics 2013, 19(3): 1071-1086. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9425-0.

  • Kotchetkov IS et al.: Brain-computer interfaces: military, neurosurgical, and ethical perspective. Neurosurg Focus 2010, 28(5): E25. doi: 10.3171/2010.2.FOCUS1027.

  • Lucivero F, Tamburrini G: Ethical monitoring of brain-machine interfaces: a note on personal identity and autonomy. AI Soc 2008, 22(3): 449-460. doi: 10.1007/s00146-007-0146-x.

  • McCullagh P, Lightbody G, Zygierewicz J, Kernohan WG: Ethical challenges associated with the development and deployment of brain computer interface technology. Neuroethics 2014, 7(2): 109-122. doi: 10.1007/s12152-013-9188-6.

  • McGie SC, Nagai MK, Artinian-Shaheen T: Clinical ethical concerns in the implantation of brain-machine interfaces: part 1: overview, target populations, and alternatives. IEEE Pulse 2013, 4(1): 28-32. doi: 10.1109/MPUL.2012.2228810.

  • McGie SC, Nagai MK, Artinian-Shaheen T: Clinical ethical concerns in the implantation of brain-machine interfaces. IEEE Pulse 2013, 4(2): 32-37. doi: 10.1109/MPUL.2013.2242014.

  • Mizushima N, Sakura O: A practical approach to identifying ethical and social problems during research and development: a model for a national research project of brain-machine interface. EASTS 2012, 6(3): 335-345. doi: 10.1215/18752160-1730938.

  • Mizushima N, Sakura O: Project-based approach to identify the ethical, legal and social implications: a model for national project of Brain Machine Interface development. Neurosci Res 2011, 71(Supp): E391. doi: 10.1016/j.neures.2011.07.1715.

  • Nijboer F, Clausen J, Allison, BZ, Haselager P: The Asilomar Survey: stakesholders’ opinions on ethical issues related to brain-computer interfacing. Neuroethics 2013, 6: 541-578. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9132-6.

  • Peterson GR: Imaging God: cyborgs, brain-machine interfaces, and a more human future. Dialog 2005, 44(4): 337-346. doi: 10.1111/j.0012-2033.2005.00277.x.

  • Rowland NC, Breshears J, Chang EF: Neurosurgery and the dawning age of brain-machine interfaces. Surg Neurol Int 2013, 4(Suppl 1): S11-S14. doi: 10.4103/2152-7806.109182.

  • Rudolph A: Military: brain machine could benefit millions. Nature 2003, 424(6947): 369. doi: 10.1038/424369b.

  • Sakura O: Brain-machine interface and society: designing a system of ethics and governance. Neurosci Res 2009, 65(Supp 1): S33. doi:10.1016/j.neures.2009.09.1687.

  • Sakura O, Mizushima N: Toward the governance of neuroscience: neuroethics in Japan with special reference to brain-machine interface (BMI). EASTS 2010, 4(1): 137-144. doi: 10.1007/s12280-010-9121-6.

  • Schermer M: The mind and the machine: on the conceptual and moral implications of brain-machine interaction. Nanoethics 2009, 3(3): 217-230. doi: 10.1007/s11569-009-0076-9.

  • Spezio ML: Brain and machine: minding the transhuman future. Dialog 2005, 44(4). 375-380. doi: 10.1111/j.0012-2033.2005.00281.x.

  • Tamburrini G: Brain to computer communication: ethical perspectives on interaction models. Neuroethics 2009, 2(3): 137-149. doi: 10.1007/s12152-009-9040-1.

  • Vlek RJ et al.: Ethical issues in brain-computer interface research, development, and dissemination. J Neurol Phys Ther 2012, 36(2): 94-99. doi: 10.1097/NPT.0b013e31825064cc.

  • Wolbring G et al.: Emerging therapeutic enhancement enabling health technologies and their discourses: what is discussed within the health domain? Healthcare (Basel) 2013, 1(1): 20-52. doi:10.3390/healthcare1010020.

  • Wolpe PR: Ethical and social challenges of brain-computer interfaces. Virtual Mentor 2007, 9(2): 128-131. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.2.msoc1-0702.

Books:
  • Grübler G, Hildt E: Brain-Computer Interfaces in Their Ethical, Social and Cultural Contexts. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014.

Book Chapters:
  • Hinterberger T: Possibilities, limits, and implications of brain-computer interfacing technologies. In Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Edited by James Giordano, Bert Gordijn. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press; 2010: 271-282.

  • Johansson V: Do brain machine interfaces on nano scale pose new ethical challenges? In Size Matters: Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Nanobiotechnology and Nano-Medicine. Edited by Johann S. Ach, Christian Weidemann. Münster: LIT Verlag; 2008: 75-99.

  • Kennedy P et al.: Making the lifetime connection between brain and machine for restoring and enhancing function. In Brain Machine Interfaces: Implications for Science, Clinical Practice and Society. Edited by Jens Schouenborg, Martin Garwicz, Nils Danielsen. Bostin: Elsevier Science; 2011:1-25.

  • Kleih SC et al.: Out of the frying pan into the fire – the P300-based BCI faces real-world challenges. In Brain Machine Interfaces: Implications for Science, Clinical Practice and Society. Edited by Jens Schouenborg, Martin Garwicz, Nils Danielsen. Bostin: Elsevier Science; 2011; 27-46.

  • Lee KY, Jang D: Ethical and social issues behind brain-computer interface. In 2013 International Winter Workshop on Brain-Computer Interface (BCI). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society; 2013: 72-75.

  • McGee EM: Brain-computer interfaces: ethical and policy considerations. Implantable Bioelectronics. Edited by Evgeny Katz. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH; 2014: 411-433.

  • McGee EM: Neuroethics and implanted brain machine interfaces. In Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies. Edited by M.G. Michael, Katina Michael. Hershey; Pennsylvania: Information Science Reference; 2014: 351-365.

  • O’Brolchain F, Gordijn B: Brain-computer interfaces and user responsibility. In Brain-Computer Interfaces in Their Ethical, Social and Cultural Contexts. Edited by Gerd Grübler, Elisabeth Hildt. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014:163-82.

  • Rao RPN: Ethics of brain-computer interfacing. In his Brain-Computer Interfacing: An Introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2013: 272-280.

  • Schulze-Bonhage A, Ball T: Entwicklung und Einsatzmöglichkeiten von Brain-Machine-Interfaces bei Epilepsiepatienten. In Das technisierte Gehirn: Neurotechnologien als Herausforderung für Ethik und Anthropologie. Edited by Oliver Müller, Jens Clausen, Giovanni Maio. Paderborn: Mentis; 2009: 35-49.

  • Sententia W: Neuroethical considerations: cognitive liberty and converging technologies for improving human cognition. In The Coevolution of Human Potential and Converging Technologies. Edited by Mihail C. Roco, Carlo Montemagno. New York: New York Academy of Sciences; 2004: 221-228.

  • Thomas AP, Prichard JR: Brain-machine interfaces: a team-taught seminar bridging disciplines and fostering discussions. In 2008 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society; 2008: 337-341.

  • Wolpe PR. Neurotechnology and brain-computer interfaces. In Emerging Technologies and Ethical Issues in Engineering: Papers from a Workshop, October 14-15, 2003. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004: 57-63.

Neuroprosthetics:
  • Alpert S: Brain-computer interface devices: risks and Canadian regulations. Account Res 2008, 15(2):63-86. doi:10.1080/08989620701783774.

  • Articulo AC : Towards an ethics of technology: re-exploring Teilhard de Chardin's theory of technology and evolution. Open J Phil 2014, 4(4):518-530. doi:10.4236/ojpp.2014.44054.

  • Attiah MA, Farah MJ: Minds and motherboards and money: futurism and realism in the neuroethics of BCI technologies. Front Syst Neurosci 2014, 8:86. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00086.

  • Baertschi B: Hearing the implant debate: therapy or cultural alienation? J Int Bioethique 2013, 24(4):71-81,181-2.

  • Baranauskas G: What limits the performance of current invasive brain machine interfaces? Front Syst Neurosci 2014, 8:68. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00068.

  • Berg AL, Herb A, Hurst M: Cochlear implants in children: ethics, informed consent, and parental decision making. The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 16(3), 239-250.

  • Berg AL, Ip SC, Hurst M, Herb A: Cochlear implants in young children: informed consent as a process and current practices. Am J Audiol 2007, 16(1): 13-28. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(2007/003).

  • Bhatt YM et al.: Device nonuse among adult cochlear implant recipients. Otol Neurotol 2005, 26(2):183-187.

  • Buller T: Neurotechnology, invasiveness and the extended mind. Neuroethics 2013, 6(3):593-605. doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9133-5.

  • Clark A: Re-inventing ourselves: the plasticity of embodiment, sensing, and mind. J Med Philos 2007, 32(3):263-282. doi:10.1080/03605310701397024.

  • Clausen J: Bonding brains to machines: ethical implications of electroceuticals for the human brain. Neuroethics 2013, 6(3):429-434. doi: 10.1007/s12152-013-9186-8.

  • Clausen J: Conceptual and ethical issues with brain-hardware interfaces. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2011, 24(6):495-501. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834bb8ca.

  • Clausen J: Ethische aspekte von gehirn-computer-schnittstellen in motorischen neuroprothesen [ethical aspects of brain-computer interfacing in neuronal motor prostheses]. IRIE 2006, 5(9):25-32.

  • Clausen J: Man, machine and in between. Nature 2009, 457(7233):1080-1081. doi:10.1038/4571080a.

  • Clausen J: Moving minds: ethical aspects of neural motor prostheses. Biotechnol J 2008, 3(12):1493-1501. doi:10.1002/biot.200800244.

  • Decker M, Fleischer T: Contacting the brain--aspects of a technology assessment of neural implants. Biotechnol J 2008, 3(12):1502-1510. doi:10.1002/biot.200800225.

  • Demetriades AK, Demetriades CK, Watts C, Ashkan K: Brain-machine interface: the challenge of neuroethics. Surgeon 2010, 8(5):267-269. doi:10.1016/j.surge.2010.05.006.

  • Dielenberg RA: The speculative neuroscience of the future human brain. Humanities 2013, 2(2):209-252. doi:10.3390/h2020209.

  • Donoghue JP: Bridging the brain to the world: a perspective on neural interface systems. Neuron 2008, 60(3):511-521. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.10.037.

  • Finlay L, Molano-Fisher P: 'Transforming' self and world: a phenomenological study of a changing lifeworld following a cochlear implant. Med Health Care Philos 2008, 11(3):255-267. doi:10.1007/s11019-007-9116-9.

  • Giselbrecht S, Rapp BE, Niemeyer CM: The chemistry of cyborgs--interfacing technical devices with organisms. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2013, 52(52):13942-13957. doi:10.1002/anie.201307495.

  • Glasser BL: Supreme Court redefines disability: limiting ADA protections for cochlear implantees in hospitals. J Leg Med 2002, 23(4):587-608. doi:10.1080/01947640290050355.

  • Grau C et al.: Conscious brain-to-brain communication in humans using non-invasive technologies. PloS One 2014, 9(8):e105225. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105225.

  • Grübler G: Beyond the responsibility gap: discussion note on responsibility and liability in the use of brain-computer interfaces. AI Soc 2011, 26(4):377-382. doi:10.1007/s00146-011-0321-y.

  • Guyot JP, Gay A, Izabel Kos MI, Pelizzone M: Ethical, anatomical and physiological issues in developing vestibular implants for human use. J Vestib Res 2012, 22(1):3-9. doi:10.3233/VES-2012-0446.

  • Haselager P, Vlek R, Hill J Nijboer F: A note on ethical aspects of BCI. Neural Netw 2009, 22(9):1352-1357. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2009.06.046.

  • Hladek GA: Cochlear implants, the deaf culture, and ethics: a study of disability, informed surrogate consent, and ethnocide. Monash Bioeth Rev 2002, 21(1):29-44.

  • Hoag H: Remote control. Nature 2003, 423(6942):796-798. doi:10.1038/423796a.

  • Huggins JE, Wolpaw JR: Papers from the Fifth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting: preface. J Neural Eng 2014, 11(3): 030301. doi:10.1088/1741-2560/11/3/030301.

  • Hyde M, Power D: Some ethical dimensions of cochlear implantation for deaf children and their families. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2006, 11(1):102-111. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enj009.

  • Jain N: Brain-machine interface: the future is now. Natl Med J India 2010, 23(6):321-323.

  • Jebari K, Hansson SO: European public deliberation on brain machine interface technology: five convergence seminars. Sci Eng Ethics 2013, 19(3): 1071-1086. doi:10.1007/s11948-012-9425-0.

  • Kermit P: Enhancement technology and outcomes: what professionals and researchers can learn from those skeptical about cochlear implants. Health Care Anal 2012, 20(4):367-384. doi:10.1007/s10728-012-0225-0.

  • Kotchetkov IS et al.: Brain-computer interfaces: military, neurosurgical, and ethical perspective. Neurosurg Focus 2010, 28(5):E25. doi:10.3171/2010.2.FOCUS1027.

  • Kübler A, Mushahwar VK, Hochberg LR, Donoghue JP: BCI Meeting 2005--workshop on clinical issues and applications. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006, 14(2):131-134. doi:10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875585.

  • Laryionava K, Gross D: Public understanding of neural prosthetics in Germany: ethical, social, and cultural challenges. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2011, 20(3):434-439. doi:10.1017/S0963180111000119.

  • Levy N: Reconsidering cochlear implants: the lessons of Martha's Vineyard. Bioethics 2002, 16(2):134-153. doi:10.1111/1467-8519.00275.

  • Lucas MS: Baby steps to superintelligence: neuroprosthetics and children. J Evol Technol 2012, 22(1):132-145.

  • Lucivero F, Tamburrini G: Ethical monitoring of brain-machine interfaces. AI & Soc 2008, 22(3):449-460. doi:10.1007/s00146-007-0146-x.

  • McCullagh P, Lightbody G, Zygierewicz J: Ethical challenges associated with the development and deployment of brain computer interface technology. Neuroethics 2014, 7(2):109-122. doi:10.1007/s12152-013-9188-6.

  • McGee EM, Maguire GQ Jr.: Becoming borg to become immortal: regulating brain implant technologies. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(3):291-302. doi:10.1017/S0963180107070326.

  • McGie S, Nagai M, Artinian-Shaheen T: Clinical ethical concerns in the implantation of brain-machine interfaces: part I: overview, target populations, and alternatives. IEEE Pulse 2013, 4(1):28-32. doi:10.1109/MPUL.2012.2228810.

  • McGie SC, Nagai MK, Artinian-Shaheen T: Clinical ethical concerns in the implantation of brain-machine interfaces. IEEE Pulse 2013, 4(2):32-37. doi:10.1109/MPUL.2013.2242014.

  • Melton MF, Backous DD: Preventing complications in pediatric cochlear implantation. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011, 19(5):358-362. doi:10.1097/MOO.0b013e32834a023b.

  • Mizushima N, Sakura O: Project-based approach to identify the ethical, legal and social implications: a model for national project of brain machine interface development. Neurosci Res 2011, 71(Suppl 1):e392. doi:10.1016/neures.2011.07.1715.

  • Mizushima N, Isobe T, Sakura O: Neuroethics at the benchside: a preliminary report of research ethics consultation in BMI studies. Neurosci Res 2009, 65(S1):S134. doi:10.1016/neures.2009.09.657.

  • Nijboer F, Clausen J, Allison BZ, Haselager P: The Asilomar Survey: stakeholders' opinions on ethical issues related to brain-computer interfacing. Neuroethics 2013, 6(3):541-578. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9132-6.

  • Nijboer F: Ethical, legal and social approach, concerning BCI applied to LIS patients. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2014, 57(Supp 1):e244. doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2014.03.1145.

  • Nikolopoulos, T. P., Dyar, D., & Gibbin, K. P. (2004). Assessing candidate children for cochlear implantation with the Nottingham Children's Implant Profile (NChIP): the first 200 children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2004, 68(2):127-135.

  • Peterson GR: Imaging god: cyborgs, brain-machine interfaces, and a more human future. Dialog J Theol 2005, 44(4):337-346. doi:10.1111/j.0012-2033.2005.00277.x.

  • Poppendieck W et al.: Ethical issues in the development of a vestibular prosthesis. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2011, 2011:2265-2268. doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090570.

  • Purcell-Davis A: The representations of novel neurotechnologies in social media: five case studies. New Bioeth 2013, 19(1):30-45. doi:10.1179/2050287713Z.00000000026.

  • Racine E et al.: "Currents of hope": neurostimulation techniques in U.S. and U.K. print media. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(3):312-316. doi:10.1017/S0963180107070351.

  • Rowland NC, Breshears J, Chang EF: Neurosurgery and the dawning age of brain-machine interfaces. Surg Neurol Int 2013, 4(2):S11-S14. doi:10.4103/2152-7806.109182.

  • Ryu SI, Shenoy KV: Human cortical prostheses: lost in translation? Neurosurg Focus 2009, 27(1):E5. doi:10.3171/2009.4.FOCUS0987.

  • Saha S, Chhatbar P: The future of implantable neuroprosthetic devices: ethical considerations. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2009, 19(2):123-137. doi:10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.v19.i2.40.

  • Sakura O: Brain-machine interface and society: designing a system of ethics and governance. Neurosci Res 2009, 65(S1):S33. doi:10.1016/j.neures.2009.09.1687.

  • Sakura O: Toward making a regulation of BMI. Neurosci Res 2011, 71(Suppl):e9. doi:10.1016/j.neures.2011.07.030.

  • Santos Santos S: Aspectos bioeticos en implantes cocleares pediatricos [Bioethical issues in pediatric cochlear implants]. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2002, 53(8):547-558.

  • Schermer M: The mind and the machine: on the conceptual and moral implications of brain-machine interaction. Nanoethics 2009, 3(3):217-230. doi:10.1007/s11569-009-0076-9.

  • Spezio ML: Brain and machine: minding the transhuman future. Dialog J Theol 2005, 44(4):375-380. doi:10.1111/j.0012-2033.2005.00281.x.

  • Tamburrini G: Brain to computer communication: ethical perspectives on interaction models. Neuroethics 2009, 2(3):137-149. doi: 10.1007/s12152-009-9040-1.

  • Taylor F, Hine C: Cochlear implants: informing commissioning decisions, based on need. J Laryngol Otol 2006, 120(12):1008-1013. doi: 10.1017/S0022215106003392.

  • Thébaut C: Dealing with moral dilemma raised by adaptive preferences in health technology assessment: the example of growth hormones and bilateral cochlear implants. Soc Sci Med 2013, 99:102-109. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.10.020.

  • Vlek RJ et al.: Ethical issues in brain-computer interface research, development, and dissemination. J Neurol Phys Ther 2012, 36(2):94-99. doi: 10.1097/NPT.0b013e31825064cc.

Books:
  • Berger TW: Toward Replacement Parts for the Brain: Implantable Biomimetic Electronics as Neural Prostheses. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2005.

  • Christiansen JB, Leigh IW: Cochlear Implants in Children: Ethics and Choices. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press; 2002.

  • Grübler G, Hildt E: Brain-Computer-Interfaces in their Ethical, Social and Cultural Contexts. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014.

  • Luppicini R: Handbook of Research on Technoself: Identity in a Technological Society. Hershey, Pa.: Information Science Reference; 2013.

Book chapters:
  • Chase VD: Ethics. In his Shattered Nerves: How Science is Solving Modern Medicine's Most Perplexing Problem. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2006:251-272.

  • Clark G: Socioeconomics and ethics. In his Cochlear Implants: Fundamentals and Applications. New York: Springer; 2003:767-786.

  • McGee EM: Brain-computer interfaces: ethical and policy considerations. In Implantable Bioelectronics. Edited by Evgeny Katz. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH; 2014:411-433.

Neural stem cells and neural tissue transplantation:
  • Albin RL: Sham surgery controls: intracerebral grafting of fetal tissue for Parkinson's disease and proposed criteria for use of sham surgery controls. J Med Ethics 2002, 28(5):322-325. doi:10.1136/jme.28.5.322.

  • American Academy of Neurology, American Neurological Association: Position statement regarding the use of embryonic and adult human stem cells in biomedical research. Neurology 2005, 64(10):1679-1680. doi: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000161879.09113.DE.

  • Anderson DK: Neural tissue transplantation in Syringomyelia: feasibility and safety. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2002, 961:263-264. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2002.tb03097.x.

  • Anisimov SV: [Cell therapy for Parkinson's disease: IV. risks and future trends.] Adv Gerontol 2009, 22(3):418-439.

  • Arias-Carrión O, Yuan TF: Autologous neural stem cell transplantation: a new treatment option for Parkinson's disease? Med Hypotheses 2009, 73(5):757-759. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.04.029.

  • Baertschi B: Intended changes are not always good, and unintended changes are not always bad--why? Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):39-40. doi:10.1080/15265160902788710.

  • Barker RA: Neural transplants for Parkinson’s disease: what are the issues? Poiesis Prax 2006, 4(2):129-143. doi:10.1007/s10202-006-0021-8.

  • Barker RA, de Beaufort I: Scientific and ethical issues related to stem cell research and interventions in neurodegenerative disorders of the brain. Prog Neurobiol 2013, 110:63-73. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.04.003.

  • Bell E et al.: Responding to requests of families for unproven interventions in neurodevelopmental disorders: hyperbaric oxygen "treatment" and stem cell "therapy" in cerebral palsy. Dev Disabil Res Rev 2011, 17(1):19-26. doi:10.1002/ddrr.134.

  • Benes FM: Deserving the last great gift. Cerebrum 2003, 5(3):61-73.

  • Benninghoff J, Möller HJ, Hampel H, Vescovi AL: The problem of being a paradigm: the emergence of neural stem cells as example for "Kuhnian" revolution in biology or misconception of the scientific community? Poiesis Prax 2009, 6(1):3-11. doi: 10.1007/s10202-008-0056-0.

  • Bjarkam CR, Sørensen JC: Therapeutic strategies for neurodegenerative disorders: emerging clues from Parkinson's disease. Biol Psychiatry 2004, 56(4):213-216. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2003.12.025.

  • Boer GJ, Widner H: Clinical neurotransplantation: core assessment protocol rather than sham surgery as control. Brain Res Bull 2002, 58(6):547-553. doi:10.1016/S0361-9230(02)00804-3.

  • Bojar M: Pohled neurologa na bunecnou a genovou lecbu chorob nervoveho system [A neurologist's views on cellular and gene therapy in nervous system diseases]. Cas Lek Cesk 2003, 142(9):534-537.

  • Carter A, Bartlett P, Hall W: Scare-mongering and the anticipatory ethics of experimental technologies. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):47-48. doi:10.1080/15265160902788736.

  • Chandran S: What are the prospects of stem cell therapy for neurology? BMJ 2008, 337:a1934. doi:10.1136/bmj.a1934.

  • Cheshire WP: Miniature human brains: an ethical analysis. Ethics Med 2014, 30(1):7-12.

  • Coors ME: Considering chimeras: the confluence of genetic engineering and ethics. Natl Cathol Bioeth Q 2006, 6(1):75-87. doi:10.5840/ncbq20066168.

  • de Amorim AR: Regulating ethical issues in cell-based interventions: lessons from universal declaration on bioethics and human rights. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):49-50. doi:10.1080/15265160902807361.

  • Drouin-Ouellet J: The potential of alternate sources of cells for neural grafting in Parkinson's and Huntington's disease. Neurodegener Dis Manag 2014, 4(4):297-307. doi:10.2217/nmt.14.26.

  • Duggan PS et al.: Unintended changes in cognition, mood, and behavior arising from cell-based interventions for neurological conditions: ethical challenges. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):31-36. doi:10.1080/15265160902788645.

  • Dunnett SB, Rosser AE: Cell transplantation for Huntington's disease: should we continue? Brain Res Bull 2007, 72(2-3):132-147. doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2006.10.019.

  • Dunnett SB, Rosser AE: Challenges for taking primary and stem cells into clinical neurotransplantation trials for neurodegenerative disease. Neurobiol Dis 2014, 61:79-89. doi:10.1016/j.nbd.2013.05.004.

  • Feldmann RE Jr., Mattern R: The human brain and its neural stem cells postmortem: from dead brains to live therapy. Int J Legal Med 2006, 120(4):201-211. doi:10.1007/s00414-005-0037-y.

  • Fisher MMJ: The BAC consultation on neuroscience and ethics an anthropologist's perspective. Innovation 2013, 12(1):40-43.

  • Gasparini M et al.: Stem cells and neurology: cues for ethical reflections. Neurol Sci 2004, 25(2):108-113. doi:10.1007/s10072-004-0241-4.

  • Gazzaniga MS: The thoughtful distinction between embryo and human. Chron High Educ 2005, 51(31):B10-B12.

  • Gazzaniga MS: What's on your mind? New Sci 2005, 186(2503):48-50.

  • Giordano J: Neuroethical issues in neurogenetic and neuro-implantation technology: the need for pragmatism and preparedness in practice and policy. Stud Ethics Law and Technol 2011, 4(3). doi:10.2202/1941-6008.1152.

  • Goldman SA: Neurology and the stem cell debate. Neurology 2005, 64(10):1675-1676. doi:10.1212/01.WNL.0000165312.12463.BE.

  • Grisolia JS: CNS stem cell transplantation: clinical and ethical perspectives. Brain Res Bull 2002, 57(6):823-826. doi:10.1016/S0361-9230(01)00766-3.

  • Grunwell J, Illes J, Karkazis K: Advancing neuroregenerative medicine: a call for expanded collaboration between scientists and ethicists. Neuroethics 2009, 2:13-20. doi:10.1007/s12152-008-9025-5.

  • Harrower TP, Barker RA: Is there a future for neural transplantation? Biodrugs 2004, 18(3):141-153. doi:10.2165/00063030-200418030-00001.

  • Hermerén G: Ethical challenges for using human cells in clinical cell therapy. Prog Brain Res 2012, 200:17-40. doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-59575-1.00002-8.

  • Hess PG: Risk of tumorigenesis in first-in-human trials of embryonic stem cell neural derivatives: ethics in the face of long-term uncertainty. Account Res 2009, 16(4):175-198. doi:10.1080/08989620903065145.

  • Hildt E: Ethical challenges in cell-based interventions for neurological conditions: some lessons to be learnt from clinical transplantation trials in patients with Parkinson's disease. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):37-38. doi:10.1080/15265160902850999.

  • Hug K, Hermerén G: Differences between Parkinson’s and Huntington’s diseases and their role for prioritization of stem cell-based treatments. I 2013, 13(5):777-791. doi: 10.2174/1566524011313050009.

  • Illes J, Reimer JC, Kwon BK. Stem cell clinical trials for spinal cord injury: readiness, reluctance, redefinition. Stem Cell Rev 2011, 7(4):997-1005. doi:10.1007/s12015-011-9259-1.

  • Kaneko N, Kako E, Sawamoto K: Prospects and limitations of using endogenous neural stem cells for brain regeneration. Genes (Basel) 2011, 2(1):107-130. doi:10.3390/genes2010107.

  • Kempermann G: Neuronal stem cells and adult neurogenesis. Ernst Schering Res Found Workshop 2002, (35):17-28.

  • Korean Movement Disorders Society Red Tulip Survey Participants et al.: Nationwide survey of patient knowledge and attitudes towards human experimentation using stem cells or bee venom acupuncture for Parkinson's disease. J Mov Disord 2014, 7(2):84-91. doi:10.14802/jmd.14012.

  • Kosta E, Bowman DM: Treating or tracking? regulatory challenges of nano-enabled ICT implants. Law Policy 2011, 33(2):256-275. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00338.x.

  • Laguna Goya R, Kuan WL, Barker RA: The future of cell therapies in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2007, 7(10):1487-1498. doi:10.1517/14712598.7.10.1487.

  • Lo B, Parham L: Resolving ethical issues in stem cell clinical trials: the example of Parkinson disease. J Law Med Ethics 2010, 38(2):257-266. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00486.x.

  • Lopes M, Meningaud JP, Behin A, Hervé C: Consent: a Cartesian ideal? human neural transplantation in Parkinson's disease. Med Law 2003, 22(1):63-71.

  • Master Z, McLeod M, Mendez I: Benefits, risks and ethical considerations in translation of stem cell research to clinical applications in Parkinson's disease. J Med Ethics 2007, 33(3):169-173. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.013169.

  • Martino G et al.: Stem cell transplantation in multiple sclerosis: current status and future prospects. Nat Rev Neurol 2010, 6(5):247-255. doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2010.35.

  • Mathews DJ et al.: Cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions: ethical challenges for early human trials. Neurology 2008, 71(4):288-293. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000316436.13659.80.

  • Medina JJ: Custom-made neural stem cells. Psychiatr Times 2011, 28(4):41-42.

  • Moreira T, Palladino P: Between truth and hope: on Parkinson’s disease, neurotransplantation and the production of the ‘self’. Hist Human Sci 2005, 18(3):55-82. doi:10.1177/0952695105059306.

  • Norman TR: Human embryonic stem cells: A resource for in vitro neuroscience research? Neuropsychopharmacology 2006, 31(12):2571-2572. doi:10.1038/sj.npp.1301126.

  • Olson SF: American Academy of Neurology development of a position on stem cell research. Neurology 2005, 64(10):1674. doi:10.1212/01.WNL.0000165657.74376.EF.

  • Pandya SK: Medical ethics in the neurosciences. Neurol India 2003, 51(3):317-322.

  • Parke S, Illes J: In delicate balance: stem cells and spinal cord injury advocacy. Stem Cell Rev 2011, 7(3):657-663. doi:10.1007/s12015-010-9211-9.

  • Pendleton C, Ahmed I, Quinones-Hinojosa A: Neurotransplantation: lux et veritas, fiction or reality? J Neurosurg Sci 2011, 55(4):297-304.

  • Pullicino PM, Burke WJ: Cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions: ethical challenges for early human trials. Neurology 2009, 72(19):1709. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000346753.90198.a6.

  • Ramos-Zúñiga R et al.: Ethical implications in the use of embryonic and adult neural stem cells. Stem Cells Int 2012, 2012:470949. doi:10.1155/2012/470949.

  • Reiner PB: Unintended benefits arising from cell-based interventions for neurological conditions. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):51-52. doi:10.1080/15265160902788769.

  • Romano G: Stem cell transplantation therapy: controversy over ethical issues and clinical relevance. Drug News Perspect 2004, 17(10):637-645.

  • Rosenberg RN, World Federation of Neurology: World Federation of Neurology position paper on human stem cell research. J Neurol Sci 2006, 243(1-2):1-2. doi:10.1016/j.jns.2006.02.001.

  • Rosenfeld JV, Bandopadhayay P, Goldschlager T, Brown DJ: The ethics of the treatment of spinal cord injury: stem cell transplants, motor neuroprosthetics, and social equity. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2008, 14(1):76-88. doi:10.1310/sci1401-76.

  • Rosser AE, Kelly CM, Dunnett SB: Cell transplantation for Huntington's disease: practical and clinical considerations. Future Neurol 2011, 6(1):45-62. doi:10.2217/fnl.10.78.

  • Rothstein JD, Snyder EY: Reality and immortality--neural stem cells for therapies. Nat Biotechnol 2004, 22(3):283-285. doi:10.1038/nbt0304-283.

  • Samarasekera N et al.: Brain banking for neurological disorders. Lancet Neurol 2013, 12(11):1096-1105. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70202-3.

  • Sanberg PR: Neural stem cells for Parkinson's disease: to protect and repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007, 104(29):11869-11870. doi:10.1073/pnas.0704704104.

  • Sayles M, Jain M, Barker RA: The cellular repair of the brain in Parkinson's disease--past, present and future. Transpl Immunol 2004, 12(3-4):321-342. doi:10.1016/j.trim.2003.12.012.

  • Schanker BD: Inevitable challenges in establishing a causal relationship between cell-based interventions for neurological conditions and neuropsychological changes. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):43-45. doi:10.1080/15265160902788686.

  • Schermer M: Changes in the self: the need for conceptual research next to empirical research. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):45-47. doi:10.1080/15265160902788744.

  • Schwartz PH, Kalichman MW: Ethical challenges to cell-based interventions for the central nervous system: some recommendations for clinical trials and practice. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(5):41-43. doi:10.1080/15265160902788694.

  • Silani V, Cova L: Stem cell transplantation in multiple sclerosis: safety and ethics. J Neurol Sci 2008, 265(1-2), 116-121. doi:10.1016/j.jns.2007.06.010.

  • Silani V, Leigh N: Stem therapy for ALS: hope and reality. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Other Motor Neuron Disord 2003, 4(1):8-10. doi:10.1080/1466082031006652.

  • Sivarajah N: Neuroregenerative gene therapy: the implications for informed consent laws. Health Law Can 2005, 26(2):19-28.

  • Takahashi R, Kondo T: [Cell therapy for brain diseases: perspective and future prospects]. Rinsho Shinkeiqaku 2011, 51(11):1075-1077.

  • Tandon PN: Transplantation and stem cell research in neurosciences: where does India stand? Neurol India 2009, 57(6):706-714. doi:10.4103/0028-3886.59464.

  • Takala T, Buller T: Neural grafting: implications for personal identity and personality. Trames 2011, 15(2):168-178. doi:10.3176/tr.2011.2.05.

  • Wang L, Lu M: Regulation and direction of umbilical cord blood mesenchymal stem cells to adopt neuronal fate. Int J Neurosci 2014, 124(3):149-159. doi:10.3109/00207454.2013.828055.

  • Wang Y: Chinese views on the ethical issues and governance of stem cell research. Eubios J Asian Int Bioeth 2014, 24(3):87-93.

Books:
  • Fangerau H, Fegert J, Trapp T: Implanted Minds: The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag; 2011.

  • Ford NM, Herbert M: Stem Cells: Science, Medicine, Law and Ethics. Strathfield, NSW, Australia: St. Pauls; 2003.

Book chapters:
  • Boer GJ: Transplantation and xenotransplantation. In Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Edited by James J. Giordano, Bert Gordijn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2010:190-215.

  • Bührle CP: Changes in personality: possible hazards arising from stem cell graft--an ethical and philosophical approach. In Implanted Minds: The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation. Edited by Heiner Fangerau, Jörg M. Fegert, Thorsten Trapp. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag; 2011:57-90.

  • Dunnett SB, Borlongan CV, Sanberg PR: Embryonic or neural stem cells in neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system (with relevance to PD, HD, AD, MS, SCI, and stroke). In Tissue and Cell Use: An Essential Guide. Edited by Ruth M. Warwick, Scott A. Brubaker. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012:358-382.

  • Goldstein J: Parfit's concept of personal identity and its implications for intercerebral stem cell transplants. In Implanted Minds: The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation. Edited by Heiner Fangerau, Jörg M. Fegert, Thorsten Trapp. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag; 2011:45-56.

  • Green RM: Ethical considerations. In Principles of Regenerative Medicine, 2 nd edition. Edited by Anthony Atala, Robert Lanza, James A. Thomson and Robert M. Nerem. London: Academic Press; 2011:1117-1130.

  • Hook L, Fulton N, Russell G, Allsopp T: Human neural stem cells for biopharmaceutical applications. In Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics. Edited by Yanhong Shi, Dennis Owen Clegg. Dordrecht: springer; 2008:123-140.

  • Macklin R: Ethics and stem cell research. In Stroke Recovery with Cellular Therapies. Edited by Sean I. Savitz, Daniel M. Rosenbaum. New York, NY: Humana Press; 2008:133-149.

  • Mauron A, Hurst S: Experimenting with innovative cell therapies for Parkinson's disease: a view from ethics. In Implanted Minds: The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation. Edited by Heiner Fangerau, Jörg M. Fegert, Thorsten Trapp. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag; 2011:107-122.

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Neural stem cell therapies. In Novel Neurotechnologies: Intervening in the Brain. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics; 2013:36-39.

Issues Concerning Pediatric Subjects/Patients:
  • Altavilla A et al.: Activity of ethics committees in Europe on issues related to clinical trials in paediatrics: results of a survey. Pharmaceuticals Policy & Law 2009, 11(1/2): 79-87. doi: 10.3233/PPL-2009-0208.

  • Ball N, Wolbring G: Cognitive enhancement: perceptions among parents of children with disabilities. Neuroethics 2014, 7(3): 345-364. doi: 10.1007/s12152-014-9201-8.

  • Battles HT, Manderson L: The Ashley Treatment: furthering the anthropology of/on disability. Med Anthropol 2008, 27(3): 219-26. doi: 10.1080/01459740802222690.

  • Bell E et al.: Responding to requests of families for unproven interventions in neurodevelopmental disorders: hyperbaric oxygen ‘treatment’ and stem cell ‘therapy’ in cerebral palsy. Dev Disabil Res Rev 2011, 17(1): 19-26. doi: 10.1002/ddrr.134.

  • Borgelt EL, Buchman DZ, Weiss M, Illes J: In search of “anything that would help”: parent perspectives on emerging neurotechnologies. J Atten Disord 2014, 18(5): 395-401. doi: 10.1177/1087054712445781.

  • Brody GH et al.: Using genetically informed, randomized prevention trials to test etiological hypotheses about child and adolescent drug use and psychopathology. Am J Public Health 2013, 103(S1): S19-S24. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.301080.

  • Caplan A: Accepting a helping hand can be the right thing to do . J Med Ethics 2013, 39(6): 367-368. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100879.

  • Clausen J: Ethical brain stimulation – neuroethics of deep brain stimulation in research and clinical practice. Eur J Neurosci 2010, 32(7): 1152-1162. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2010.07421.x.

  • Coch D: Neuroimaging research with children: ethical issues and case scenarios. J Moral Educ 2007, 36(1): 1-18. doi: 10.1080/03057240601185430.

  • Cohen Kadosh K, Linden DE, Lau JY: Plasticity during childhood and adolescence: innovative approaches to investigating neurocognitive development. Dev Sci 2013, 16(4): 574-583. doi: 10.1111/desc.12054.

  • Cole CM, et al.: Ethical dilemmas in pediatric and adolescent psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Epilepsy Behav 2014, 37: 145-150. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.06.019.

  • Connors CM, Singh I: What we should really worry about in pediatric functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). AJOB 2009, 9(1): 16-18. doi: 10.1080/15265160802617944.

  • Cornfield DN, Kahn JP: Decisions about life-sustaining measures in children: in whose best interests? Acta Paediatr 2012, 101(4): 333-336. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02531.x.

  • Croarkin PE, Wall CA, Lee J: Applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in child and adolescent psychiatry. Int Rev Psychiatry 2011, 23(5): 445-453. doi: 10.3109/09540261.2011.623688.

  • Davis NJ: Transcranial stimulation of the developing brain: a plea for extreme caution. Front Hum Neurosci 2014, 8:600. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00600.

  • Denne SC: Pediatric clinical trial registration and trial results: an urgent need for improvement. Pediatrics 2012, 129(5):e1320-1321. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-0621.

  • Derivan AT et al.: The ethical use of placebo in clinical trials involving children. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol2004, 14(2): 169-174. doi:10.1089/1044546041649057.

  • DeVeaugh-Geiss J et al.: Child and adolescent psychopharmacology in the new millennium: a workshop for academia, industry, and government. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2006, 45(3): 261-270. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000194568.70912.ee.

  • Di Pietro NC, Illes J: Disclosing incidental findings in brain research: the rights of minors in decision-making. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013, 38(5): 1009-1013. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24230.

  • Downie J, Marshall J: Pediatric neuroimaging ethics. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2007, 16(2): 147-160. doi: 10.1017/S096318010707017X .

  • Elger BS, Harding TW: Should children and adolescents be tested for Huntington’s Disease? attitudes of future lawyers and physicians in Switzerland. Bioethics 2006, 20(3): 158-167. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00489.x.

  • Fenton A, Meynell L, Baylis F: Ethical challenges and interpretive difficulties with non-clinical applications of pediatric FMRI. Am J Bioeth 2009, 9(1): 3-13. doi: 10.1080/15265160802617829.

  • Focquaert F: Deep brain stimulation in children: parental authority versus shared decision-making. Neuroethics 2013, 6(3): 447-455. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9098-4.

  • Gilbert DL et al.: Should transcranial magnetic stimulation research in children be considered minimal risk? Clin Neurophysiol 2004, 115(8): 1730-1739. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2003.10.037.

  • Greenhill LL et al.: Developing methodologies for monitoring long-term safety on psychotropic medications in children: report on the NIMH Conference, September 25, 2000. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2003, 42(6): 651-655. doi: 10.1097/01.CHI.0000046842.56865.EC.

  • Hardiman M, Rinne L, Gregory E, Yarmolinskaya J: Neuroethics, neuroeducation, and classroom teaching: where the brain sciences meet pedagogy. Neuroethics 2012, 5(2): 135-143. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9116-6.

  • Hinton VJ: Ethics of neuroimaging in pediatric development. Brain Cogn 2002, 50(3): 455-468. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2626(02)00521-3.

  • Hyman SE: Might stimulant drugs support moral agency in ADHD children? J Med Ethics 2013, 39(6): 369-370. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100846.

  • Illes J, Raffin TA: No child left without a brain scan? toward a pediatric neuroethics. Cerebrum 2005, 7(3): 33-46.

  • Kadosh RC et al.: The neuroethics of non-invasive brain stimulation. Curr Bio 2012, 22(4): R108-R111. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.01.013.

  • Koelch M, Schnoor K, Fegert JM: Ethical issues in psychopharmacology of children and adolescents. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2008, 21(6): 598-605. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e328314b776. 

  • Kölch M et al.: Safeguarding children's rights in psychopharmacological research: ethical and legal issues. Curr Pharm Des 2010, 16(22): 2398-2406. doi: 10.2174/138161210791959881.

  • Kumra S et al.: Ethical and practical considerations in the management of incidental findings in pediatric MRI studies. J Am Acad Child Adolesc 2006, 45(8): 1000-1006. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000222786.49477.a8.

  • Ladd RE: Rights of the autistic child. Int'l J Child Rts 2005, 13(1/2): 87-98. doi: 10.1163/1571818054545303.

  • Lantos JD: Dangerous and expensive screening and treatment for rare childhood diseases: the case of Krabbe disease. Dev Disabil Res Rev 2011. 17(1): 15-18. doi: 10.1002/ddrr.133.

  • Lantos JD: Ethics for the pediatrician: the evolving ethics of cochlear implants in children. Pediatr Rev 2012, 33(7):323-326. doi:10.1542/pir.33-7-323.

  • Larivière-Bastien D, Racine E: Ethics in health care services for young persons with neurodevelopmental disabilities: a focus on cerebral palsy. J Child Neurol 2011, 26(10): 1221-1229. doi: 10.1177/0883073811402074.

  • Lefaivre MJ, Chambers CT, Fernandez CV: Offering parents individualized feedback on the results of psychological testing conducted for research purposes with children: ethical issues and recommendations. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 2007, 36(2): 242-252. doi: 10.1080/15374410701279636.

  • Lev O, Wilfond BS, McBride CM: Enhancing children against unhealthy behaviors—an ethical and policy assessment of using a nicotine vaccine. Public Health Ethics 2013, 6(2): 197-206. doi: 10.1093/phe/pht006.

  • Lucas MS: Baby steps to superintelligence: neuroprosthetics and children. J Evol Technol 2012, 22(1):132-145.

  • Martin A, Gilliam WS, Bostic JQ, Rey JM: Child psychopharmacology, effect sizes, and the big bang. Am J Psychiatry 2005, 162(4): 817. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.4.817-a.

  • Maslen H, Earp BD, Cohen Kadosh R, Savulescu J: Brain stimulation for treatment and enhancement in children: an ethical analysis. Front Hum Neurosci 2014, 8: 953. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00953

  • Maxwell B, Racine E: Does the neuroscience research on early stress justify responsive childcare? examining interwoven epistemological and ethical challenges. Neuroethics 2012, 5(2): 159-172. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9110-z.

  • Miziara ID, Miziara CS, Tsuji RK, Bento RF: Bioethics and medical/legal considerations on cochlear implants in children. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2012, 78(3):70-79. doi:10.1590/S1808-86942012000300013.

  • Moran FC et al.: Effect of home mechanical in-exsufflation on hospitalisation and life-style in neuromuscular disease: a pilot study. J Paediatr Child Health 2013, 49(3): 233-237. doi: 10.1111/jpc.12111.

  • Nelson EL: Ethical concerns associated with childhood depression. Bioethics Forum 2002, 18(3-4): 55-62.

  • Nikolopoulos TP, Dyar D, Gibbin KP: Assessing candidate children for cochlear implantation with the Nottingham Children's Implant Profile (NChIP): the first 200 children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2004, 68(2):127-135. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2003.09.019.

  • Northoff G: Brain and self--a neurophilosophical account. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 2013, 7(1): 1-12. doi: 10.1186/1753-2000-7-28.

  • Parens E, Johnston J: Understanding the agreements and controversies surrounding childhood psychopharmacology. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 2008, 2(1):5. doi:10.1186/1753-2000-2-5.

  • Post SG: In defense of myoblast transplantation research in preteens with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Pediatr Transplant 2010, 14(7): 809-812. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3046.2009.01235.x.

  • Pumariega AJ, Joshi SV: Culture and development in children and youth. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am 2010, 19(4): 661-680. doi: 10.1016/j.chc.2010.08.002.

  • Racine E et al.: Ethics challenges of transition from paediatric to adult health care services for young adults with neurodevelopmental disabilities. Paediatr Child Health 2014, 19(2): 65-68.

  • Sach TH, Barton GR: Interpreting parental proxy reports of (health-related) quality of life for children with unilateral cochlear implants. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2007, 71(3):435-445. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2006.11.011.

  • Seki A et al.: Incidental findings of brain magnetic resonance imaging study in a pediatric cohort in Japan and recommendation for a model management protocol.J Epidemiol 2010, 20 (Suppl 2): S498-S504. doi: 10.2188/jea.JE20090196.

  • Shearer MC, Bermingham SL: The ethics of paediatric anti-depressant use: erring on the side of caution. J Med Ethics 2008, 34(10): 710-714. doi:10.1136/jme.2007.023119.

  • Shiloff JD, Magwood B, Malisza KL: MRI research proposals involving child subjects: concerns hindering research ethics boards from approving them and a checklist to help evaluate them. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2011, 20(1): 115-129. doi: 10.1017/S096318011000068X.

  • Singh I, Kelleher K: Neuroenhancement in young people: proposal for research, policy, and clinical management. AJOB Neurosci 2010, 1(1): 3-16. doi: 10.1080/21507740903508591.

  • Singh I: Not robots: children's perspectives on authenticity, moral agency and stimulant drug treatments. J Med Ethics 2013, 39(6): 359-366. doi:10.1136/medethics-2011-100224.

  • Sparks JA, Duncan BL: The ethics and science of medicating children. Ethical Hum Psychol Psychiatry 2004, 6(1): 25-39.

  • Spetie L, Arnold LE: Ethical issues in child psychopharmacology research and practice: emphasis on preschoolers. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2007, 191(1): 15-26. doi:10.1007/s00213-006-0685-8.

  • Tan JO, Koelch M: The ethics of psychopharmacological research in legal minors. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 2008, 2(1): 39. doi:10.1186/1753-2000-2-39.

  • Teagle HF: Cochlear implantation for children: opening doors to opportunity. J Child Neurol 2012, 27(6):824-826. doi:10.1177/0883073812442590.

  • Thomason ME: Children in non-clinical functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies give the scan experience a “thumbs up”. Bioethics 2009, 9(1): 25-27. doi: 10.1080/15265160802617928.

  • Tusaie KR: Is the tail wagging the dog in pediatric bipolar disorder? Arch Psychiatri Nurs 2010, 24(6): 438-439. doi:10.1016/j.apnu.2010.07.011.

Books:
  • Arden JB, Linford L: Brain-Based Therapy with Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Treatment for Everyday Practice. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons; 2008.

  • Comite Consultatif National d'Ethique pour les Sciences de la Vie et de la Sante (CCNE). Problèmes Ethiques Posés par des Démarches de Prédiction Fondées sur la Détection de Troubles Précoces du Comportement chez l'Enfant. Avis n° 95. Paris: CCNE; 2007.

  • Wasserman LH, Zambo D: Early Childhood and Neuroscience – Links to Development and Learning. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.

Book Chapters:
  • Chugani DC, Sukel K: Bringing the brain of the child with autism back on track. In Cerebrum 2007: Emerging Ideas in Brain Science. Edited by Cynthia A. Read. New York: Dana Press; 2007: 111-124.

  • Farah MJ, Noble KG, Hurt H: Poverty, privilege, and brain development: empirical findings and ethical implications. In Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice, and Policy. Edited by Judy Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006: 277-287.

  • Fegert JM: Questions on deep brain stimulation on children and juveniles with neuropsychiatric disorders with extremely adverse course. In Implanted Minds: The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation. Edited by Heiner Fangerau, Jörg Fegert, Thorsten Trapp. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag; 2011: 281-289.

  • Fisher RL, Fisher S: Antidepressants for children. In An Anthology of Psychiatric Ethics. Edited by Stephen A. Green, Sidney Bloch. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006: 239-241.

  • Gomez C: Children, maldynic pain, and the creation of suffering: toward an ethic of lamentation. In Maldynia: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Illness of Chronic Pain. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2011: 221-228.

  • Hadskis MR, Schmidt MH: Pediatric neuroimaging research. In Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:389-404.

  • Johnston J, Parens E: Neuroethical issues in the diagnosis and treatment of children with mood and behavorial disturbances. In Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Jens Clausen, Neil Levy. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014: 1673-1688.

  • Larcher V: Ethics. In Oxford Textbook of Palliative Care for Children. Edited by Ann Goldman, Richard Hain, Stephen Liben. Oxford: oxford University Press; 2006: 42-62.

  • Luciana M: Development of the adolescent brain: neuroethical implications for the understanding of executive function and social cognition. In Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 59-83.

  • Moula A, Puddephatt AJ, Mohseni S: A neuropragmatist framework for childhood education: integrating pragmatism and neuroscience to actualize Article 29 of the UN Child Convention. In Neuroscience, Neurophilosophy and Pragmatism: Brains at Work with the World. Edited by Tibor Solymosi, John R. Shook. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2014: 215-239.

  • Singh I, Kelleher K: The case for clinical management of neuroenhancement in young people. In Neuroethics in Practice. Edited by Anjan Chatterjee, Martha J. Farah. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013: 16-34.

  • Stein Z, Della Chiesa BE, Hinton C, Fischer KW: Ethical issues in educational neuroscience: raising children in a brave new world. In Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 803-822.

  • Swanson JM, Wigal T, Lakes K, Volkow ND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: defining a spectrum disorder and considering neuroethical implications. In Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Judy Illes and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011:309-340.

Dual-use neuroscientific research:
  • Canli T et al.: Neuroethics and national security. Am J Bioeth 2007, 7(5): 3-13. doi: 10.1080/15265160701290249.

  • Coupland RM: Incapacitating chemical weapons: a year after the Moscow theatre siege. Lancet 2003, 362(9393): 1346. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14684-3.

  • Dando M: Advances in neuroscience and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. Biotechnol Res Int 2011, 2011:973851. doi: 10.4061/2011/973851.

  • Dolin G: A healer or an executioner? the proper role of a psychiatrist in a criminal justice system. J Law Health 2002-2003, 17(2): 169-216.

  • Douglas T: The dual-use problem, scientific isolationism and the division of moral labour. Monash Bioeth Rev 2014, 32(1-2): 86-105.

  • Giordano J, Kulkarni A, Farwell J: Deliver us from evil? the temptation, realities, and neuroethico-legal issues of employing assessment neurotechnologies in public safety initiatives. Theor Med Bioeth 2014, 35(1):73-89. doi:10.1007/s11017-014-9278-4.

  • Latzer B: Between madness and death: the medicate-to-execute controversy. Crim Justice Ethics 2003, 22(2): 3-14. doi:10.1080/0731129X.2003.9992146.

  • Lev O, Miller FG, Emanuel EJ: The ethics of research on enhancement interventions. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2010, 20(2): 101-113. doi: 10.1353/ken.0.0314.

  • Marchant GE, Gulley L: National security neuroscience and the reverse dual-use dilemma. AJOB Neurosci 2010, 1(2): 20-22. doi: 10.1080/21507741003699348.

  • Marks JH: Interrogational neuroimaging in counterterrorism: a “no-brainer” or a human rights hazard? Am J Law Med 2007, 33(2-3): 483-500.

  • Marks JH: A neuroskeptic’s guide to neuroethics and national security. AJOB Neurosci 2010, 1(2): 4-14. doi: 10.1080/21507741003699256.

  • Moreno JD: Dual use and the “moral taint” problem. Am J Bioeth 2005, 5(2): 52-53. doi: 10.1080/15265160590961013.

  • Moreno JD: Mind wars: brain science and the military. Monash Bioeth Rev 2013, 31(2):83-99.

  • Murphy TF: Physicians, medical ethics, and capital punishment. J Clin Ethics 2005, 16(2), 160-169.

  • Nagel SK: Critical perspective on dual-use technologies and a plea for responsibility in science. AJOB Neurosci 2010, 1(2): 27-28. doi: 10.1080/21507741003699413.

  • Resnik DB: Neuroethics, national security and secrecy. Am J Bioeth 2007, 7(5): 14-15. doi:10.1080/15265160701290264.

  • Roedig E: German perspective: commentary on "recommendations for the ethical use of pharmacologic fatigue countermeasures in the U.S. military.” Aviat Space Environ Med 2007, 78(5): B136-B137.

  • Rose N: The Human Brain Project: social and ethical challenges. Neuron 2014, 82(6): 1212-1215. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.06.001.

  • Sehm B, Ragert P: Why non-invasive brain stimulation should not be used in military and security services. Front.Hum Neurosci 2013, 7:553. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00553.

  • Tennison MN, Moreno JD: Neuroscience, ethics, and national security: the state of the art. PLoS Biol 2012, 10(3):e1001289. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001289.

  • Voarino N: Reconsidering the concept of ‘dual-use’ in the context of neuroscience research. BioéthiqueOnline 2014, 3/16: 1-6.

  • Walsh C: Youth justice and neuroscience: a dual-use dilemma. Br J Criminol 2011, 51(1): 21-29. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azq061.

  • Wheelis M, Dando M: Neurobiology: a case study on the imminent militarization of biology. Revue Internationale de la Croix-Rouge/International Review of the Red Cross 2005, 87(859): 563-571. doi: 10.1017/S1816383100184383.

  • Zimmerman E, Racine E. Ethical issues in the translation of social neuroscience: a policy analysis of current guidelines for public dialogue in human research. Account Res 2012, 19(1): 27-46. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2012.650949.

  • Zonana H: Physicians must honor refusal of treatment to restore competency by non-dangerous inmates on death row. J Law Med Ethics 2010, 38(4): 764-773. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00530.x.

Books:
  • Committee on Military and Intelligence Methodology for Emergent Neurophysiology and Cognitive/Neural Science Research in the Next Two Decades. Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2008.

  • Ezzedine B, Adineh M, Satter M, Mantil JC: Advanced Neuroscience Interface Research. Kettering OH: Wallace-Kettering Neuroscience Institute, and Ft. Belvoir, VA: Ft. Belvoir Defense Technical Information Center; 2002.

  • Giordano JJ: (Ed): Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014, 2015.

  • Moreno JD: Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense. New York: Dana Press; 2006.

  • Moreno JD: Mind Wars: Brain Science and the Military in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Bellevue Literary Press; 2012.

Book chapters:
  • Abney K, Lin P, Mehlman M: Military neuroenhancement and risk assessment. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 239-248.

  • Balaban CD: Neurotechnology and operational medicine. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 65-78.

  • Bartolucci V, Dando M: What does neuroethics have to say about the problem of dual use? In On the Dual Uses of Science and Ethics: Principles, Practices, and Prospects. Edited by Brian Rappert, Michael J. Selgelid. Canberra, Australia: ANU Press; 2013: 29-44.

  • Bell C: Why neuroscientists should take the pledge: a collective approach to the misuse of neuroscience. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 227-238.

  • Benanti P: Between neuroskepticism and neurogullibility: the key role of neuroethics in the regulation and mitigation of neurotechnology in national security and defense. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 217-225.

  • Casebeer WD: Postscript: a neuroscience and national security normative framework for the twenty-first century. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 279-283.

  • Dando M: Neuroscience advances and future warfare. In Handbook of Neuroethics. Edited by Jens Clausen, Neil Levy. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014, 2015: 1785-1800.

  • Ganis G: Investigating deception and deception detection with brain stimulation methods. In Detecting Deception: Current Challenges and Cognitive Approaches. Edited by Pär Anders Granhag, Aldert Vrij, Bruno Verschuere. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2014, 2015: 253-268.

  • Giordano J: Neurotechnology, global relations, and national security: shifting contexts and neuroethical demands. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 1-10.

  • Farwell JP: Issues of law raised by developments and use of neuroscience and neurotechnology in national security and defense. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 133-165.

  • Marchant GE, Gaudet LM: Neuroscience, national security, and the reverse dual-use dilemma. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James J. Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 167-178.

  • Marks JH: Neuroskepticism: rethinking the ethics of neuroscience and national security. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 179-198.

  • McCreight R: Brain brinksmanship: devising neuroweapons looking at battlespace, doctrine, and strategy. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 115-132.

  • Murray S, Yanagi MA: Transitioning brain research: from bench to battlefield. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James J. Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 11-22.

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Non-therapeutic applications. In its Novel Neurotechnologies: Intervening in the Brain. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics; 2013: 162-190.

  • Oie KS, McDowell K: Neurocognitive engineering for systems’ development. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James J. Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 33-50.

  • Paulus MP et al.: Neural mechanisms as putative targets for warfighter resilience and optimal performance. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James J. Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 51-63.

  • Stanney KM et al.: Neural systems in intelligence and training applications. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James J. Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 23-32.

  • Tabery J: Can (and should) we regulate neurosecurity? lessons from history. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 249-258.

  • Thomsen K: Prison camp or “prison clinic?”: biopolitics, neuroethics, and national security. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 199-216.

  • Tractenberg RE, FitzGerald KT, Giordano J: Engaging neuroethical issues generated by the use of neurotechnology in national security and defense: toward process, methods, and paradigm. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 259-277.

  • Wurzman R, Giordano J: “NEURINT” and neuroweapons: neurotechnologies in national intelligence and defense. In Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Edited by James Giordano. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2014, 2015: 79-113.

Discussion and conclusions

As demonstrated by this bibliography, the breadth and depth of the literature addressing the “ethics of neuroscience” is extensive. Indeed, many of the ethical issues fostered by brain science affect the foci, scope and conduct of clinical care, as much of neuroscientific and neurotechnological research is oriented and being explicitly directed toward translational applications in medicine. In the clinical milieu, the use of various neuroscientific approaches and tools evokes additional, and frequently more provocative, if not contentious issues, questions, problems and debates, and calls forth possible solutions that are specific to patient care, and the execution and sustainability of both (neuro)science and medicine as viable and valuable public good(s). Literature addressing such applications of brain science will be presented in Part 4 of this bibliographic series.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by funding from the Clark Foundation, William H. and Ruth Crane Schaefer Endowment, Children’s Hospital and Clinics Foundation of Minneapolis (JG), and the Neuroethics Studies Program of the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics of Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA (JG; KB). The authors thank Sherry Loveless for assistance in the preparation of this manuscript.

Authors’ contributions

AM, KB and MD were responsible for data collection; MD and JG were responsible for data interpretation and manuscript preparation, and JG was responsible for study idea, development, design, and revision and critical review of the manuscript. All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center
(2)
Department of Neuroscience, Amherst College
(3)
Bioethics Research Library, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University
(4)
Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, Georgetown University Medical Center

References

  1. Darragh M, Buniak L, Giordano J. A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: part 2: neuroscientific studies of morality and ethics. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2015;10:2. doi:10.1186/s13010-015-0022-0.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Roskies A. Neuroethics for a new millenium. Neuron. 2002;35(1):21–3. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00763-8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Giordano J. Neuroethics: traditions, tasks, and values. Hum Prospect. 2011;1(1):2–8.Google Scholar
  4. Giordano J, Shook JR. Minding brain science in medicine: on the need for neuroethical engagement for guidance of neuroscience in clinical contexts. Ethics Biol Eng Med. 2015;6(1–2):37–42. doi:10.1615/EthicsBiologyEngMed.2015015333.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Illes J. The art of medicine: empowering brain science with neuroethics. Lancet. 2010;376(9749):1294–5. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61904-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Giordano J, Gordijn B, editors. Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
  7. Racine E. Interdisciplinary approaches for a pragmatic neuroethics. Am J Bioeth. 2008;8(1):52–3. doi:10.1080/15265160701828444.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Giordano J. Neuroethics: interacting “traditions” as a viable meta-ethics. AJOB Neurosci. 2011;2(2):17–9. doi:10.1080/21507740.2011.559922.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Shook JR, Giordano J. A principled and cosmopolitan neuroethics: considerations for international relevance. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2014;9:1. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-9-1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Lanzilao E, Shook JR, Benedikter R, Giordano J. Advancing neuroscience on the 21st century world state: the need for and a proposed structure of an internationally relevant neuroethics. Ethics Biol Eng Med. 2013;4(3):211–29. doi:10.1615/EthicsBiologyEngMed.2014010710.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Shook JR, Galvagni L, Giordano J. Cognitive enhancement kept within contexts: neuroethics and informed public policy. Front Syst Neurosci. 2014;8:228. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00228.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Stein DJ, Giordano J. Global mental health and neuroethics. BMC Med. 2015;13:44. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0274-y.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Shook JR, Giordano J. Neuroethics beyond normal. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2016;25(1):121–40. doi:10.1017/S0963180115000377.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Buniak L, Darragh M, Giordano J. A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: part 1: overview and reviews--defining and describing the field and its practices. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2014;9:9. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-9-9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2016