Dementia Research on Facebook and Twitter: Current Practice and Challenges.

BACKGROUND: Social media is a powerful tool for engaging diverse audiences in dementia research. However, there is little data summarizing current content exchange in this context. OBJECTIVE: To inform ethical dementia research engagement on social media, we characterized current practices by analyzing public social media posts. METHODS: We retrieved Facebook (2-year period, N = 7,896) and Twitter (1-year period, N = 9,323) posts containing dementia research-related keywords using manual and machine learning-based search strategies. We performed qualitative and quantitative content and sentiment analyses on random samples (10%) of the posts. RESULTS: Top Facebook users were advocacy (45%) and health organizations (25%). On Twitter, academics/researchers were the largest user group. Prevention was the most frequently coded theme (Facebook 30%; Twitter 26%), followed by treatment (Facebook 15%; Twitter 18%). Diagnostics had the highest Facebook engagement. Sharing knowledge was the primary form of content exchange (Facebook 63%; Twitter 80%). Most shared journal articles were peer-reviewed and open access. Emotional tone was overall more positive on Facebook. Justice was a prominent ethics topic regarding inequalities related to identity and intersecting modes of marginalization in dementia research. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate the importance of social media as an engagement tool of current topics in health research and reveal areas of potential for increased engagement. These data can inform consensus-based best practices for ethical social media application in dementia research.

Wearable Biosensors in the Workplace: Perceptions and Perspectives.

Objectives: Wearable body and brain sensors are permeating the consumer market and are increasingly being considered for workplace applications with the goal of promoting safety, productivity, health, and wellness. However, the monitoring of physiologic signals in real-time prompts concerns about benefit and risk, ownership of such digital data, data transfer privacy, and the discovery and disclosure of signals of possible health significance. Here we explore the perceptions and perspectives of employers and employees about key ethical considerations regarding the potential use of sensors in the workplace. Methods: We distributed a survey developed and refined based on key research questions and past literature to a wide range and size of industries in British Columbia, Canada. Both employers (potential Implementers) and employees (potential Users) were invited to participate. Results: We received 344 survey responses. Most responses were from construction, healthcare, education, government, and utilities sectors. Across genders, industries, and workplace sizes, we found a convergence of opinions on perceived benefit and concern between potential Implementers and potential Users regarding the motivation to use biosensors in the workplace. Potential Implementers and Users also agreed on issues pertaining to safety, privacy, disclosure of findings of possible medical significance, risks, data ownership, data sharing, and transfer of data between workplaces. The greatest variability between potential Users and Implementers pertained to data ownership. Conclusion: Strong agreement in the perception of biosensor use in the workplace between potential Implementers and Users reflects shared interest, motivation, and responsibility for their use. The use of sensors is rapidly increasing, and transparency about key use factors-both practical and ethical-is essential to maintain the current and desirable level of solidarity.

Clinician preferences for neurotechnologies in pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy: A discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: Novel and minimally invasive neurotechnologies offer the potential to reduce the burden of epilepsy while avoiding the risks of conventional resective surgery. Few neurotechnologies have been tested in randomized controlled trials with pediatric populations, leaving clinicians to face decisions about whether to recommend these treatments with insufficient evidence about the relevant risks and benefits. This study specifically explores the preferences of clinicians for treating pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) with novel neurotechnologies. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit the preferences of clinicians with experience in treating children with DRE using novel neurotechnological interventions. The preferences for six key attributes used when making treatment decisions (chances of clinically significant improvement in seizures, major and minor risks from intervention, availability of evidence, financial burden for the family, and access to the intervention) were estimated using a conditional logit model. The estimates from this model were then used to predict the adoption of existing novel neurotechnological interventions. RESULTS: Sixty-eight clinicians completed the survey: 33 neurosurgeons, 28 neurologists, and 7 other clinicians. Most clinicians were working in the United States (74%), and the remainder (26%) in Canada. All attributes, apart from the nearest location with access to the intervention, influenced preferences significantly. The chance of clinically significant improvement in seizures was the most positive influence on clinician preferences, but low-quality evidence and a higher risk of major complications could offset these preferences. Of the existing neurotechnological interventions, vagus nerve stimulation was predicted to have the highest likelihood of adoption; deep brain stimulation had the lowest likelihood of adoption. SIGNIFICANCE: The preferences of clinicians are drive primarily by the likelihood of achieving seizure freedom for their patients, but preferences for an intervention are largely eradicated if only low quality of evidence supporting the intervention is available. Until better evidence supporting the use of potentially effective, novel neurotechnologies becomes available, clinicians are likely to prefer more established treatments.

Understanding Attributes that Influence Physician and Caregiver Decisions About Neurotechnology for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Formative Qualitative Study to Support the Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports formative qualitative research used to analyze decision making regarding neurotechnological interventions for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy from the perspective of physicians and caregivers and the derivation of attributes for a discrete choice experiment. METHODS: Purposive and convenience sampling was used to recruit physicians and caregivers. Physician focus group sessions were held at key national conferences in the USA and Canada. Caregivers were approached through clinics with established epilepsy surgery programs in the USA and Canada. Thematic analysis was used to identify critical features of decisions about treatment outcomes, procedural trade-offs, values, and concerns surrounding conventional and novel pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy interventions among physicians and caregivers. RESULTS: The results highlight the presence of central attributes that are considered by both groups in decision making, such as "chances of seizure freedom", "risk", "availability of evidence", and "cost to families", as well as attributes that reflect important differences between groups. Physicians were focused on the specifics of treatment options, while caregivers thought more holistically, considering the overall well-being of their children. DISCUSSION: The findings shaped the development of a discrete choice experiment to understand the likely uptake of different neurotechnologies. We identified differences in decision making and thus designed two discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy treatments, one aimed at clinicians and one at caregivers. The variation we observed highlights the value of seeking to understand the influences at the point of clinical decision making and incorporating this information into care.

From vision to action: Canadian leadership in ethics and neurotechnology.

This chapter explores the complex neuroethical aspects of neurosurgery and neuromodulation in the context of Canadian healthcare and innovation, as seen through the lens of the Pan Canadian Neurotechnology Ethics Consortium (PCNEC). Highlighted are key areas of ethical focus, each with its own unique challenges: technical advances, readiness and risk, vulnerable populations, medico-legal issues, training, and research. Through an exploration of Canadian neurotechnological practice from these various clusters, we provide a critical review of progress, describe opportunities to address areas of debate, and seek to foster ethical innovation. Underpinning this comprehensive review are the fundamental principles of solution-oriented, practical neuroethics, with beneficence and justice at the core. In our view, it is a moral imperative that neurotechnological advancements include a delineation of ethical priorities for future guidelines, oversight, and interactions.

Choice and Trade-offs: Parent Decision Making for Neurotechnologies for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.

This qualitative study investigated factors that guide caregiver decision making and ethical trade-offs for advanced neurotechnologies used to treat children with drug-resistant epilepsy. Caregivers with affected children were recruited to semi-structured focus groups or interviews at one of 4 major epilepsy centers in Eastern and Western Canada and the USA (n = 22). Discussions were transcribed and qualitative analytic methods applied to examine values and priorities (eg, risks, benefits, adherence, invasiveness, reversibility) of caregivers pertaining to novel technologies to treat drug-resistant epilepsy. Discussions revealed 3 major thematic branches for decision making: (1) features of the intervention-risks and benefits, with an emphasis on an aversion to perceived invasiveness; (2) decision drivers-trust in the clinical team, treatment costs; and (3) quality of available information about neurotechnological options. Overall, caregivers' definition of treatment success is more expansive than seizure freedom. The full involvement of their values and priorities must be considered in the decision-making process.

Novel Neurotechnological Interventions for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Physician Perspectives.

This qualitative study investigated factors that guide physicians' choices for minimally invasive and neuromodulatory interventions as alternatives to conventional surgery or medical management for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy. North American physicians were recruited to one of 4 focus groups at national conferences. Discussions were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. A pragmatic neuroethics framework was applied to interpret results. Discussions revealed 2 major thematic branches: (1) clinical decision making and (2) ethical considerations. Under clinical decision making, physicians emphasized scientific evidence and patient candidacy when assessing neurotechnologies for patients. Ongoing seizures without intervention was important for safety and neurodevelopment. Under ethical considerations, resource allocation, among other financial considerations for technology adoption, were considerable sources of pressure on decision making. Access to neurotechnology was a salient theme differentiating Canadian and American contexts. When assessing novel neurotechnological interventions for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy, physicians balance clinical and ethical factors to guide decision making and best practice.

Youth Weigh In: Views on Advanced Neurotechnology for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy affects over 500,000 children in North America of whom 30% have drug-resistant epilepsy. Advancements with neurotechnologies show promising benefits, but the perceptions of these procedures by youth is unknown. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 10 youth in British Columbia, Canada who underwent procedures for drug-resistant epilepsy involving different forms of neurotechnology (subdural grids, vagus nerve stimulation, responsive neurostimulation). Interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative qualitative method. RESULTS: Four major thematic categories emerged from the interviews. Treatment values, impact of the disorder, personal context, and impact of neurotechnology. CONCLUSIONS: Besides the predictable goal of seizure reduction, a desire for autonomy and the importance of trust in the medical team emerged as dominant values within the 4 thematic categories that were explicit to the use of new neurotechnologies for the management of drug-resistant epilepsy.

Privacy Challenges to the Democratization of Brain Data.

Wearable devices that record brain signals may present privacy concerns for consumers. Industry leaders discussed four such concerns with us that pertain to data collection and management, user autonomy and information transparency, exceptionalism of brain data, and regulatory systems.