Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review
Abstract Closed-loop (CL) neurotechnology, which dynamically adapts to patients’ neural states, offers new opportunities for treating neurological and psychiatric disorders. However, its real-time feedback mechanisms raise critical ethical challenges. This scoping review assesses whether and how cli...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-08-01
|
| Series: | npj Digital Medicine |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01908-4 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849341536735592448 |
|---|---|
| author | Lea Haag Georg Starke Markus Ploner Marcello Ienca |
| author_facet | Lea Haag Georg Starke Markus Ploner Marcello Ienca |
| author_sort | Lea Haag |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Closed-loop (CL) neurotechnology, which dynamically adapts to patients’ neural states, offers new opportunities for treating neurological and psychiatric disorders. However, its real-time feedback mechanisms raise critical ethical challenges. This scoping review assesses whether and how clinical studies involving CL neurotechnologies address ethical concerns. We analyzed peer-reviewed research on human participants to evaluate both the presence and depth of ethical engagement. Despite the prominence of CL systems in neuroethical discourse, explicit ethical assessments remain rare. Ethical issues are typically addressed only implicitly, folded into technical or procedural discussions without structured analysis. Most notably, our findings reveal a persistent gap between regulatory compliance and meaningful ethical reflection. To address this, we propose empirically grounded, community-responsive recommendations to strengthen ethical oversight in this field. These recommendations aim to support governance frameworks that are context-sensitive, reflexive, and capable of addressing the complex ethical terrain introduced by adaptive neurotechnologies. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-c60a927a98d04331babdedeff67a6d79 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2398-6352 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-08-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | npj Digital Medicine |
| spelling | doaj-art-c60a927a98d04331babdedeff67a6d792025-08-20T03:43:36ZengNature Portfolionpj Digital Medicine2398-63522025-08-018111410.1038/s41746-025-01908-4Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping reviewLea Haag0Georg Starke1Markus Ploner2Marcello Ienca3Laboratory of Ethics of AI & Neuroscience, Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich (TUM)Laboratory of Ethics of AI & Neuroscience, Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich (TUM)Center for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine and Department of Neurology, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich (TUM)Laboratory of Ethics of AI & Neuroscience, Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich (TUM)Abstract Closed-loop (CL) neurotechnology, which dynamically adapts to patients’ neural states, offers new opportunities for treating neurological and psychiatric disorders. However, its real-time feedback mechanisms raise critical ethical challenges. This scoping review assesses whether and how clinical studies involving CL neurotechnologies address ethical concerns. We analyzed peer-reviewed research on human participants to evaluate both the presence and depth of ethical engagement. Despite the prominence of CL systems in neuroethical discourse, explicit ethical assessments remain rare. Ethical issues are typically addressed only implicitly, folded into technical or procedural discussions without structured analysis. Most notably, our findings reveal a persistent gap between regulatory compliance and meaningful ethical reflection. To address this, we propose empirically grounded, community-responsive recommendations to strengthen ethical oversight in this field. These recommendations aim to support governance frameworks that are context-sensitive, reflexive, and capable of addressing the complex ethical terrain introduced by adaptive neurotechnologies.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01908-4 |
| spellingShingle | Lea Haag Georg Starke Markus Ploner Marcello Ienca Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review npj Digital Medicine |
| title | Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review |
| title_full | Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review |
| title_fullStr | Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review |
| title_short | Ethical gaps in closed-loop neurotechnology: a scoping review |
| title_sort | ethical gaps in closed loop neurotechnology a scoping review |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01908-4 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT leahaag ethicalgapsinclosedloopneurotechnologyascopingreview AT georgstarke ethicalgapsinclosedloopneurotechnologyascopingreview AT markusploner ethicalgapsinclosedloopneurotechnologyascopingreview AT marcelloienca ethicalgapsinclosedloopneurotechnologyascopingreview |