Data sharing and privacy issues in neuroimaging research: Opportunities, obstacles, challenges, and monsters under the bed

Collaborative networks and data sharing initiatives are broadening the opportunities for the advancement of science. These initiatives offer greater transparency in science, with the opportunity for external research groups to reproduce, replicate, and extend research findings. Further, larger datasets offer the opportunity to identify homogeneous patterns within subgroups of individuals, where these patterns may be obscured by the heterogeneity of the neurobiological measure in smaller samples. However, data sharing and data pooling initiatives are not without their challenges, especially with new laws that may at first glance appear quite restrictive for open science initiatives. Interestingly, what is key to some of these new laws (i.e, the European Union's general data protection regulation) is that they provide greater control of data to those who "give" their data for research purposes. Thus, the most important element in data sharing is allowing the participants to make informed decisions about how they want their data to be used, and, within the law of the specific country, to follow the participants' wishes. This framework encompasses obtaining thorough informed consent and allowing the participant to determine the extent that they want their data shared, many of the ethical and legal obstacles are reduced to just monsters under the bed. In this manuscript we discuss the many options and obstacles for data sharing, from fully open, to federated learning, to fully closed. Importantly, we highlight the intersection of data sharing, privacy, and data ownership and highlight specific examples that we believe are informative to the neuroimaging community.

Emerging ethical issues raised by highly portable MRI research in remote and resource-limited international settings

Smaller, more affordable, and more portable MRI brain scanners offer exciting opportunities to address unmet research needs and long-standing health inequities in remote and resource-limited international settings. Field-based neuroimaging research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) can improve local capacity to conduct both structural and functional neuroscience studies, expand knowledge of brain injury and neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders, and ultimately improve the timeliness and quality of clinical diagnosis and treatment around the globe. Facilitating MRI research in remote settings can also diversify reference databases in neuroscience, improve understanding of brain development and degeneration across the lifespan in diverse populations, and help to create reliable measurements of infant and child development. These deeper understandings can lead to new strategies for collaborating with communities to mitigate and hopefully overcome challenges that negatively impact brain development and quality of life. Despite the potential importance of research using highly portable MRI in remote and resource-limited settings, there is little analysis of the attendant ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI). To begin addressing this gap, this paper presents findings from the first phase of an envisioned multi-staged and iterative approach for creating ethical and legal guidance in a complex global landscape. Section 1 provides a brief introduction to the emerging technology for field-based MRI research. Section 2 presents our methodology for generating plausible use cases for MRI research in remote and resource-limited settings and identifying associated ELSI issues. Section 3 analyzes core ELSI issues in designing and conducting field-based MRI research in remote, resource-limited settings and offers recommendations. We argue that a guiding principle for field-based MRI research in these contexts should be including local communities and research participants throughout the research process in order to create sustained local value. Section 4 presents a recommended path for the next phase of work that could further adapt these use cases, address ethical and legal issues, and co-develop guidance in partnership with local communities.

Ethical Considerations in Communicating Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Biomarker Test Results to Symptomatic Individuals

This article examines ethical issues associated with the return of AD neuroimaging results to cognitively symptomatic individuals. Following a review of research on patient and study partner reactions to learning the results of biomarker testing for AD, we examine ethical issues that will be of increasing significance as the field transitions to an era wherein disease-modifying treatments for AD become available. We first review the ethical justification for returning AD biomarker results to individuals who desire them. We then address a more novel question: whether, and to what extent, clinicians or clinical researchers should influence the decisions of individuals who are potentially reluctant to learn their AD imaging results. We argue that in many cases, it is ethically correct to explore, and sometimes alter, factors that may be inhibiting one's desire to know these test results. Our argument is grounded in the premise that having more complete information about changes that may be happening in one's brain will generally yield more informed participation in decisions about one's own care, thereby promoting autonomy. Finally, on the assumption that we have established that it is frequently ethically correct to try to communicate testing information, we examine considerations regarding (not whether but) how this is best accomplished, discussing the concept of responsible transparency. We suggest that both (1) explorations of why one may or may not want to learn results of AD biomarker imaging and (2) the responsible return of such test results is best accomplished using a transactional model of communication.

Alive inside

This article provides an ethical analysis of the U.S. practice guideline update on disorders of consciousness. Our analysis focuses on the guideline's recommendations regarding the use of investigational neuroimaging methods to assess brain-injured patients. Complex and multifaceted ethical issues have emerged because these methods alter the clinical understanding of consciousness. We address issues of false hope, patient suffering, and cost. We argue that, in spite of these concerns, there is significant benefit to using neuroimaging to assess brain-injured patients in most cases.

Potential Reporting Bias in Neuroimaging Studies of Sex Differences

Numerous functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have reported sex differences. To empirically evaluate for evidence of excessive significance bias in this literature, we searched for published fMRI studies of human brain to evaluate sex differences, regardless of the topic investigated, in Medline and Scopus over 10 years. We analyzed the prevalence of conclusions in favor of sex differences and the correlation between study sample sizes and number of significant foci identified. In the absence of bias, larger studies (better powered) should identify a larger number of significant foci. Across 179 papers, median sample size was n = 32 (interquartile range 23-47.5). A median of 5 foci related to sex differences were reported (interquartile range, 2-9.5). Few articles (n = 2) had titles focused on no differences or on similarities (n = 3) between sexes. Overall, 158 papers (88%) reached "positive" conclusions in their abstract and presented some foci related to sex differences. There was no statistically significant relationship between sample size and the number of foci (-0.048% increase for every 10 participants, p = 0.63). The extremely high prevalence of "positive" results and the lack of the expected relationship between sample size and the number of discovered foci reflect probable reporting bias and excess significance bias in this literature.

The Ethics of "Choosing Wisely": The Use of Neuroimaging for Uncomplicated Headache

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for evaluation of headache remains excessive among physicians across many specialties according to both the American Headache Society and the American College of Radiology, despite recent attempts at limiting overuse of imaging and procedures. As part of the Choosing Wisely campaign, both of these organizations have explicitly recommended against imaging in patients with uncomplicated or typical migraine headaches. Yet, the practice nevertheless remains prevalent, with estimates ranging from 12.4% to 15.9% of patients with uncomplicated headache receiving MRI in outpatient practices. The low prevalence of serious pathological findings on imaging in patients who present without other indicative symptoms and the high cost of such exams necessitates a thorough evaluation of appropriate use of MRI for headache. Here, we debate the problematic use of MRI for uncomplicated headache and put forth a discussion of possible interventions that could promote more efficient use of imaging. Overuse of imaging has the potential to open a box that cannot readily be closed, and physicians upstream of surgical decision making must remain aware of the downstream effects of their clinical choices.

Neuroimaging: beginning to appreciate its complexities

For over a century, scientists have sought to see through the protective shield of the human skull and into the living brain. Today, an array of technologies allows researchers and clinicians to create astonishingly detailed images of our brain's structure as well as colorful depictions of the electrical and physiological changes that occur within it when we see, hear, think and feel. These technologies-and the images they generate-are an increasingly important tool in medicine and science. Given the role that neuroimaging technologies now play in biomedical research, both neuroscientists and nonexperts should aim to be as clear as possible about how neuroimages are made and what they can-and cannot-tell us. Add to this that neuroimages have begun to be used in courtrooms at both the determination of guilt and sentencing stages, that they are being employed by marketers to refine advertisements and develop new products, that they are being sold to consumers for the diagnosis of mental disorders and for the detection of lies, and that they are being employed in arguments about the nature (or absence) of powerful concepts like free will and personhood, and the need for citizens to have a basic understanding of how this technology works and what it can and cannot tell us becomes even more pressing.

Seeing responsibility: can neuroimaging teach us anything about moral and legal responsibility?

As imaging technologies help us understand the structure and function of the brain, providing insight into human capabilities as basic as vision and as complex as memory, and human conditions as impairing as depression and as fraught as psychopathy, some have asked whether they can also help us understand human agency. Specifically, could neuroimaging lead us to reassess the socially significant practice of assigning and taking responsibility? While responsibility itself is not a psychological process open to investigation through neuroimaging, decision-making is. Over the past decade, different researchers and scholars have sought to use neuroimaging (or the results of neuroimaging studies) to investigate what is going on in the brain when we make decisions. The results of this research raise the question whether neuroscience-especially now that it includes neuroimaging-can and should alter our understandings of responsibility and our related practice of holding people responsible. It is this question that we investigate here.

Ethics of neuroimaging after serious brain injury

BACKGROUND

Patient outcome after serious brain injury is highly variable. Following a period of coma, some patients recover while others progress into a vegetative state (unresponsive wakefulness syndrome) or minimally conscious state. In both cases, assessment is difficult and misdiagnosis may be as high as 43%. Recent advances in neuroimaging suggest a solution. Both functional magnetic resonance imaging and electroencephalography have been used to detect residual cognitive function in vegetative and minimally conscious patients. Neuroimaging may improve diagnosis and prognostication. These techniques are beginning to be applied to comatose patients soon after injury. Evidence of preserved cognitive function may predict recovery, and this information would help families and health providers. Complex ethical issues arise due to the vulnerability of patients and families, difficulties interpreting negative results, restriction of communication to "yes" or "no" answers, and cost. We seek to investigate ethical issues in the use of neuroimaging in behaviorally nonresponsive patients who have suffered serious brain injury. The objectives of this research are to: (1) create an approach to capacity assessment using neuroimaging; (2) develop an ethics of welfare framework to guide considerations of quality of life; (3) explore the impact of neuroimaging on families; and, (4) analyze the ethics of the use of neuroimaging in comatose patients.

METHODS/DESIGN

Our research program encompasses four projects and uses a mixed methods approach. Project 1 asks whether decision making capacity can be assessed in behaviorally nonresponsive patients. We will specify cognitive functions required for capacity and detail their assessment. Further, we will develop and pilot a series of scenarios and questions suitable for assessing capacity. Project 2 examines the ethics of welfare as a guide for neuroimaging. It grounds an obligation to explore patients' interests, and we explore conceptual issues in the development of a quality of life instrument adapted for neuroimaging. Project 3 will use grounded theory interviews to document families' understanding of the patient's condition, expectations of neuroimaging, and the impact of the results of neuroimaging. Project 4 will provide an ethical analysis of neuroimaging to investigate residual cognitive function in comatose patients within days of serious brain injury.

Deliver us from evil? The temptation, realities, and neuroethico-legal issues of employing assessment neurotechnologies in public safety initiatives

In light of the recent events of terrorism and publicized cases of mass slayings and serial killings, there have been calls from the public and policy-makers alike for neuroscience and neurotechnology (neuroS/T) to be employed to intervene in ways that define and assess, if not prevent, such wanton acts of aggression and violence. Ongoing advancements in assessment neuroS/T have enabled heretofore unparalleled capabilities to evaluate the structure and function of the brain, yet each and all are constrained by certain technical and practical limitations. In this paper, we present an overview of the capabilities and constraints of current assessment neuroS/T, address neuro-ethical and legal issues fostered by the use and potential misuse of these approaches, and discuss how neuroethics may inform science and the law to guide right and sound applications of neuroS/T to "deliver us from evil" while not being led into temptations of ampliative claims and inapt use.

Incidental finding of tumor while investigating subarachnoid hemorrhage: ethical considerations and practical strategies

High-resolution neuroimaging modalities are used often in studies involving healthy volunteers. Subsequently, a significant increase in the incidental discovery of asymptomatic intracranial abnormalities raised the important ethical issues of when follow-up and treatment may be necessary. We examined the literature to establish a practical set of criteria for approaching incidental findings. Our objective is to develop an algorithm for when follow-up may be important and to provide recommendations that would increase the likelihood of follow-up. A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases to identify articles describing brain tumors and intracranial aneurysms. The treatment algorithm we present suggests that incidental intracranial masses suspicious for glioma should be biopsied or resected, while other masses are to be followed with serial imaging based on the expected growth pattern. Lack of follow-up can result in adverse outcomes that can be mitigated by using technology to facilitate communication and improve follow-up care. The importance of training physicians to be good communicators is also stressed. New technology including automated telephone systems, texting and email will improve access to patients and hopefully encourage compliance and follow-up.

Obscuring surface anatomy in volumetric imaging data

The identifying or sensitive anatomical features in MR and CT images used in research raise patient privacy concerns when such data are shared. In order to protect human subject privacy, we developed a method of anatomical surface modification and investigated the effects of such modification on image statistics and common neuroimaging processing tools. Common approaches to obscuring facial features typically remove large portions of the voxels. The approach described here focuses on blurring the anatomical surface instead, to avoid impinging on areas of interest and hard edges that can confuse processing tools. The algorithm proceeds by extracting a thin boundary layer containing surface anatomy from a region of interest. This layer is then "stretched" and "flattened" to fit into a thin "box" volume. After smoothing along a plane roughly parallel to anatomy surface, this volume is transformed back onto the boundary layer of the original data. The above method, named normalized anterior filtering, was coded in MATLAB and applied on a number of high resolution MR and CT scans. To test its effect on automated tools, we compared the output of selected common skull stripping and MR gain field correction methods used on unmodified and obscured data. With this paper, we hope to improve the understanding of the effect of surface deformation approaches on the quality of de-identified data and to provide a useful de-identification tool for MR and CT acquisitions.

A neuroimaging proof of principle study of Down's syndrome and dementia: ethical and methodological challenges in intrusive research

BACKGROUND

Research into specific illnesses and the development of new treatments may only become possible as new technologies become available. When used for research, such technologies may best be described as 'intrusive', in that they require a considerable willingness and commitment on the part of the participants. This has increasingly been the case for brain disorders and illnesses where novel neuroimaging techniques, often combined with clinical and psychological assessments, have the potential to result in new understanding. People with intellectual disabilities (ID) have a history of under-representation as participants in research using such technologies and are therefore at risk of not receiving equal access to state-of-the-art treatments. We propose that 'intrusive' biomedical research is both possible and ethical in ID, and explore some of the methodological challenges by reference to a recent proof of principle study that used a relatively new ligand-based brain scanning technique in a group of volunteers with Down's syndrome.

METHODS

Five overlapping stages of the study methodology were identified and evaluated for their acceptability to volunteers with mild to moderate ID through discussion, reflection, and analysis of structured feedback in the context of key policy documents, ethical guidelines and relevant legislation.

RESULTS

Identification of key ethical and methodological challenges from reflective practice and participant feedback facilitated the emergence of strategies that permitted continual refinement of the study design. Important areas considered included (1) being clear about the purpose and scientific justification for the study; (2) reconciling the potential risks and benefits with relevant ethical guidelines and legislation; (3) identifying and implementing effective recruitment strategies; (4) optimising and assessing capacity to consent; and (5) making the 'intrusive' procedures as acceptable as possible to people with ID.

CONCLUSION

We were able to demonstrate that a proof of principle study incorporating a novel brain scanning technique in a group of volunteers with ID was feasible, safe and well tolerated, despite the vulnerabilities of the study cohort and the intrusive nature of the research. We consider the study within an ethical and historical discourse about the principles that define current 'best practice' in ID research and propose a number of key recommendations for making intrusive research acceptable in people with ID.

Neuroethical issues in clinical neuroscience research

In this chapter, we use the special features of neuroimaging to illustrate research ethics issues for the clinical neurologic sciences, and focus on one particularly compelling case: studies involving first-episode schizophrenic treatment-naïve individuals (FESTNIs) (Eijkholt et al., 2012). FESTNIs are scanned prior to the administration of medication in order to control for the confounding effects of treatment. By concentrating on this program of research, we capture the distinctive ethical challenges associated with neuroimaging research overall, and foreground the issues particular to neuroimaging research involving FESTNIs that have yet to receive sufficient attention in the literature. We highlight assessment of risks and burdens, including risks associated with treatment delays and incidental findings; assessment of benefit, including direct benefit, social value, and scientific quality; subject selection; justice questions related to responsiveness and poststudy access; and, finally, issues related to consent and capacity.

Translating neuroethics: reflections from Muslim ethics: commentary on "Ethical concepts and future challenges of neuroimaging: an islamic perspective"

Muslim ethics is cautiously engaging developments in neuroscience. In their encounters with developments in neuroscience such as brain death and functional magnetic resonance imaging procedures, Muslim ethicists might be on the cusp of spirited debates. Science and religion perform different kinds of work and ought not to be conflated. Cultural translation is central to negotiating the complex life worlds of religious communities, Muslims included. Cultural translation involves lived encounters with modernity and its byproduct, modern science. Serious ethical debate requires more than just a mere instrumental encounter with science. A robust Muslim approach to neuroethics might require an emulsion of religion and neuroscience, thought and body, and body and soul. Yet one must anticipate that Muslim debates in neuroethics will be inflected with Muslim values, symbols and the discrete faith perspectives of this tradition with meanings that are specific to people who share this worldview and their concerns.

Ethical concepts and future challenges of neuroimaging: an Islamic perspective

Neuroscience is advancing at a rapid pace, with new technologies and approaches that are creating ethical challenges not easily addressed by current ethical frameworks and guidelines. One fascinating technology is neuroimaging, especially functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). Although still in its infancy, fMRI is breaking new ground in neuroscience, potentially offering increased understanding of brain function. Different populations and faith traditions will likely have different reactions to these new technologies and the ethical challenges they bring with them. Muslims are approximately one-fifth of world population and they have a specific and highly regulated ethical and moral code, which helps them deal with scientific advances and decision making processes in an Islamically ethical manner. From this ethical perspective, in light of the relevant tenets of Islam, neuroimaging poses various challenges. The privacy of spirituality and the thought process, the requirement to put community interest before individual interest, and emphasis on conscious confession in legal situations are Islamic concepts that can pose a challenge for the use of something intrusive such as an fMRI. Muslim moral concepts such as There shall be no harm inflicted or reciprocated in Islam and Necessities overrule prohibitions are some of the criteria that might appropriately be used to guide advancing neuroscience. Neuroscientists should be particularly prudent and well prepared in implementing neuroscience advances that are breaking new scientific and ethical ground. Neuroscientists should also be prepared to assist in setting the ethical frameworks in place in advance of what might be perceived as runaway applications of technology.

Picturing neuroscience research through a human rights lens: imaging first-episode schizophrenic treatment-naive individuals

In this paper we examine imaging research involving first-episode schizophrenic treatment-naive individuals (FESTNIs) through a legal human rights lens; in particular, the lens of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine Concerning Biomedical Research. We identify a number of ethical and legal hot spots highlighted by the Protocol, and offer a series of recommendations designed to ensure the human rights compatibility of this research. Subsequently, we argue that the lack of reporting on design elements related to ethical concerns frustrates commitments at the heart of the human rights approach, namely, transparency and openness to international scrutiny. To redress this problem, we introduce two norms for the first time: ethical transparency, and ethical reproducibility. When concluding, we offer a set of reporting guidelines designed to operationalize these norms in the context of imaging research involving FESTNIs. Though we will not make this case here, we believe that parallel reporting guidelines should be incorporated into other areas of research involving human subjects.

Legal liability and research ethics boards: the case of neuroimaging and incidental findings

Neuroimaging research covers a wide range of intriguing issues from revealing brain structures to investigating what happens in our brain when we lie. The field appears to be thriving, but skepticism and alertness to the various ethical, scientific, policy and philosophical challenges associated with it also appear to be on the rise. One particularly complex issue concerns what to do with incidental findings that emerge during the course of neuroimaging research. Research ethics boards (REBs) play a central role in research oversight. In this paper, we will consider some of the potential issues associated with REB liability in negligence in the context of incidental findings in neuroimaging research.

Neuroimaging and neuroethics: imaging the ethics in neuroscience

This paper outlines the topics that are on the intersection of neuroethics and neuroimaging domain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An extensive search through Medline bibliographic database was performed for a period of 12 years (1997-2009), using a combination of 3 keywords ("ethics", "neuroethics", "neuroimaging"). The search returned 119 indexed articles, of which 102 were found relevant. The articles were classified in two main categories tackling ethical challenges in basic research (55 papers) and applied clinical research and practice (39 papers).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

For each of the categories, the majority of articles came under one of the following topics--the neural basis of emotion, reasoning and personality (30 papers) and ethics of neuroimaging in disorders of consciousness (15 papers). The appointed topics stand at the very intersection of the neuroethics and neuroimaging domain, evidencing their strong interdependent relationship. Furthermore, the number of topics and corresponding articles has been steadily increasing over the years (minimal in 1997, maximal in 2009). These data are in good acconcordance with other scientific findings. Also, they correspond to the period of progress in the investigated disciplines, giving rise to the fact that future advances in neuroethics are in strong correlation to the advances of neuroimaging technologies.

In quest of constitutional principles of "neurolaw"

The growing use of brain imaging technology and the developing of cognitive neuroscience pose unaccustomed challenges to legal systems. Until now, the fields of Law much affected are the civil and criminal law and procedure, but the constitutional dimension of "neurolaw" cannot be easily underestimated. As the capacity to investigate and to trace brain mechanisms and functional neural activities increases, it becomes urgent the recognition and definition of the unalienable rights and fundamental values in respect of this new techno-scientific power, that must be protected and safeguard at "constitutional level" of norms such as: human dignity, personal identity, authenticity and the pursuit of individual "happiness". As the same as for the law regulating research and experimentation on human genome adopted in the past years, one may also argue if the above mentioned fundamental principles of "neurolaw" must be fixed and disciplined also at European and International level.