A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: Part 4 - Ethical issues in clinical and social applications of neuroscience

Background As a discipline, neuroethics addresses a range of questions and issues generated by basic neuroscientific research (inclusive of studies of putative neurobiological processes involved in moral and ethical cognition and behavior), and its use and meanings in the clinical and social spheres. Here, we present Part 4 of a four-part bibliography of the neuroethics literature focusing on clinical and social applications of neuroscience, to include: the treatment-enhancement discourse; issues arising in neurology, psychiatry, and pain care; neuroethics education and training; neuroethics and the law; neuroethics and policy and political issues; international neuroethics; and discourses addressing "trans-" and "post-" humanity. Methods To complete a systematic survey of the 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 When taken with Parts 1-3, this bibliography aims to provide a listing of international peerreviewed papers, books, and book chapters published from 2002 through 2016. While seeking to be as comprehensive as possible, it may be that some works were inadvertently and unintentionally not included. We therefore invite commentary from the field to afford completeness and contribute to this bibliography as a participatory work-in-progress.


Introduction
In A Theory of Justice, philosopher John Rawls proposed that the ethico-legal structure of society is based those ways that constructs of rightness or wrongness are applied to any situation [1]. The citations in this fourth part of a bibliography of neuroethics reflect works that focus upon the social aspects of research and clinical advances in the brain sciences. To be sure, neuroscience is not confined to the laboratory, as the demand for, and concomitant concerns about "bench-to-bedside" translation are increasing. Questions about the use of neuroscientific approaches to define normality; the meaning and relevance of what constitutes (and who receives) treatment or enhancement; the ability and validity of using neuroimaging to depict consciousness; and the trajectory of human biology and society, each and all arise from the interfluence of neuroscientific advancement and social expectation(s) and anxieties. Addressing these questions is, and will not be, simple or easy. As Illes et al. have noted, "…frontier technology that is able to touch on our personhood, especially in bioscience and information science, is shaping our future" [2].
The direction of brain science can, and arguably should be guided by neuroethics. The neuroethics literature "… seeks to give neuroscience what bioethics and the ethical, legal and social implication (ELSI) programs provided for the human genome project: a platform for scientists, lawyers, philosophers, sociologists, other scholars and the general public to interact and discuss the future of neuroscience" [3]. In this way, the literatureand this bibliographyprovide a view to the discourse to date, and the foundation upon which to build engagement at present and in the future. To be sure, this future will ever more involve, and affect the world stage, as brain science becomes an increasingly international enterprise. Viewed from an international vantage point, neuroethics has the potential to go beyond "…absolutism, cultural essentialisms, and unrealistic ethical philosophies, [and] arrives at a small set of principles about proper human flourishing that are more culturally inclusive and cosmopolitan in spirit…empowerment, non-obsolescence, self-creativity, and citizenship" [4].
The inclusion of "citizenship" is important, because both professionals (in the natural, physical, life and social sciences, medicine, and government) and various publics "…must have the powerdefined by quality of knowledge and ease of accessto help shape that future". … It is in this spirit that a consistent goal of this bibliographic series is to invite ongoing professional and public participation in contributing to its further development, and in so doing bolstering the informational groundwork upon which the future of neuroscience can stand.
The following bibliographies provide neuroethics' literature on the clinical and social implications of neurological advances from 2002-2016. The bibliographies cover a range of topics, to include: I. Health care a) issues in/of the treatment-enhancement discourse b) ethical issues in neurology (including neurorehabilitation) c) ethical issues in psychiatry (including gender and LGBT issues) d) ethical issues in anesthesiology/pain medicine (including addiction) II. Neuroethics education/training III. Neuroethics and law IV. Neuroethics and policy and politics V. International neuroethics VI."Trans"/"post" human issues Methods for systematically searching relevant literature devoted to neuroethics are identical to those utilized in the first 3 parts of this bibliography [5][6][7]. 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 1975Ethics from -2000 Citations were retrieved from the following databases: 1) U.S. National Library of Medicine's PubMed and NLM Catalog 2) Academic Search Premier 3) Proquest Research Library 4) JSTOR 5) WorldCat 6) Philosopher's Index 7) Embase 8) BELIT 9) Web of Knowledge/Web of Science 10) Digital Public Library of America 11) Directory of Open Access Journals 12) Hathi Trust Digital Library 13)Internet Archive 14) Globethics.net 15) Neuroethics-Wikiography These listings of citations are "participatory bibliographies" in that readers are encouraged to submit additional cites via the "Comments" section of this document or by contacting the bibliographic manager at bioethics@georgetown.edu.

Discussion and conclusions
It is our intent that this bibliography will provide background resources that can foster a greater understanding of recent ethical issues in translational neurosciences, facilitate deeper discourse about such issues, and contribute to a more complete view of the literature in neuroethics, if not the field, at large. In regarding this work, it becomes clear that neuroethics is a sub-field of bioethics, and thus as a focused aspect of ethics in general [8][9][10]. The "substrates" of such ethical address and analyses are research and applications of brain science, and both are involved, to some extent, with a contingent understanding of the relationships of brain structure to functions of thought, emotion and behavior. Thus, it could be argued that many (if not all) of the questions of this field are either directly or indirectly entwined with what Chalmers has called the "hard problem" of neuroscience [11]. Does this make neuroethics somewhat different from other domains of ethical analysis? Perhaps, in that there are persistent unknowns that pervade vantage point develop and enhance the discipline and practices of neuroethics and its value to brain science and society both at present, and in the future.