Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2013 | 8 | 6 | 720-724
Article title

Ethical considerations in the use of brain-computer interfaces

Title variants
Languages of publication
Nervous system disorders are among the most severe disorders. Significant breakthroughs in contemporary clinical practice may provide brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) and neuroprostheses (NPs). The aim of this article is to investigate the extent to which the ethical considerations in the clinical application of brain-computer interfaces and associated threats are being identified. Ethical considerations and implications may significantly influence further development of BCIs and NPs. Moreover, there is significant public interest in supervising this development. Awareness of BCIs’ and NPs’ threats and limitations allow for wise planning and management in further clinical practice, especially in the area of long-term neurorehabilitation and care.
Physical description
1 - 12 - 2013
6 - 12 - 2013
  • Rehabilitation Clinic, The 10th Military Clinical Hospital with Polyclinic, Bydgoszcz, Poland
  • [1] Mikołajewska E., Mikołajewski D., Neuroprostheses for increasing disabled patients’ mobility and control, Adv Clin Exp Med, 2012, 21, 263–272
  • [2] Mikołajewska E., Mikołajewski D., Technical and medical problems concerning wider use of neuroprostheses in patients with neurologic disorders, JNNN, 2012, 1, 119–123
  • [3] Hansson S. O., Implant ethics, J Med Ethics, 2005, 31, 519–525[Crossref]
  • [4] Clausen J., Moving minds: ethical aspects of neural motor prostheses, Biotechnol J, 2008, 3, 1493–1501[Crossref]
  • [5] Saha S., Chhatbar P., The future of implantable neuroprosthetic devices: ethical considerations, J Long Term Eff Med Implants, 2009, 19, 123–137[Crossref]
  • [6] Glannon W., Stimulating brains, altering minds, J Med Ethics, 2009, 35, 289–292[Crossref][WoS]
  • [7] Ford P. J., Kubu C. S., Stimulating debate: ethics in a multidisciplinary functional neurosurgery committee, J Med Ethics, 2006, 32, 106–109[Crossref]
  • [8] Mikołajewska E., Biofeedback as the element of the neurorehabilitation, J Health Sci, 2012, 2, 135–148
  • [9] Xu J., Shen L. X., Yan C. H., et al. Personal characteristics related to the risk of adolescent internet addiction: a survey in Shanghai, China. BMC Public Health, 2012, 12: 1106[WoS][Crossref]
  • [10] Heinz A., Kipke R., Heimann H., et al., Cognitive neuroenhancement: false assumptions in the ethical debate, J Med Ethics, 2012, 38, 372–375[Crossref][WoS]
  • [11] Shaw D. M., Neuroenhancers, addiction and research ethics, J Med Ethics, 2012, 38, 605–608.[Crossref]
  • [12] Warvick K., I, cyborg, Champaign: University of Illinois Press 2004
  • [13] Honeybul S., Gillett G. R., Ho K. M., et al., Neurotrauma and the rule of rescue, J Med Ethics 2011, 37, 707–710[Crossref][WoS]
  • [14] Breshears J. D., Gaona C. M., Roland J. L., et al., Decoding motor signals from the pediatric cortex: implications for brain-computer interfaces in children, Pediatrics, 2011, 128, e160–168[WoS][Crossref]
  • [15] Roland J., Miller K., Freudenburg Z., et al., The effect of age on human motor electrocorticographic signals and implications for brain-computer interface applications, J Neural Eng, 2011, 8, 046013[WoS][Crossref]
  • [16] Kübler A., Birbaumer N., Brain-computer interfaces and communication in paralysis: extinction of goal directed thinking in completely paralysed patients?, Clin Neurophysiol, 2008, 119, 2658–2666[Crossref][WoS]
  • [17] Kübler A., Furdea A., Halder S., et al. A brain-computer interface controlled auditory event-related potential (p300) spelling system for locked-in patients. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 2009, 1157, 90–100[Crossref]
  • [18] Haselager P., Vlek R., Hill J., et al., A note on ethical aspects of BCI, Neural Netw, 2009, 22, 1352–1357.[WoS][Crossref]
  • [19] Jox R. J., Schaider A., Marckmann G., et al., Medical futility at the end of life: the perspectives of intensive care and palliative care clinicians, J Med Ethics, 2012, 38, 540–545[Crossref][WoS]
  • [20] McFarland D. J., Sarnacki W. A., Wolpaw J. R., Should the parameters of a BCI translation algorithm be continually adapted?, J Neurosci Methods, 2011, 199, 103–107[WoS][Crossref]
  • [21] 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, 205–217[Crossref][WoS]
  • [22] Shannon C. E., A mathematical theory of communication, The Bell System Technical Journal, 1948, 27, 379–423, 623–656[Crossref]
  • [23] van den Brand R., Heutschi J., Barraud Q., et al., Restoring voluntary control of locomotion after paralyzing spinal cord injury, Science, 2012, 336, 1182–1185[Crossref][WoS]
  • [24] Dominici N., Keller U., Vallery H., et al., Versatile robotic interface to evaluate, enable and train locomotion and balance after neuromotor disorders, Nat Med, 2012, 18, 1142–1147[WoS][Crossref]
  • [25] Voge C. M., Stegemann J. P., Carbon nanotubes in neural interfacing applications, J Neural Eng, 2011, 8, 011001[Crossref]
  • [26] Kotchetkov I. S., Hwang B. Y., Appelboom G., et al., Brain-computer interfaces: military, neurosurgical, and ethical perspective, Neurosurg Focus, 2010, 28, E25[Crossref][WoS]
  • [27] Vlek R. J., Steines D., Szibbo D., et al., Ethical issues in brain-computer interface research, development, and dissemination, J Neurol Phys Ther, 2012, 36, 94–99[WoS][Crossref]
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.