Towards a Governance Framework for Brain Data

Neuroethics - Tập 15 - Trang 1-14 - 2022
Marcello Ienca1,2, Joseph J. Fins3, Ralf J. Jox4, Fabrice Jotterand5,6, Silja Voeneky7, Roberto Andorno8, Tonio Ball9, Claude Castelluccia10, Ricardo Chavarriaga11,7, Hervé Chneiweiss12, Agata Ferretti2, Orsolya Friedrich13, Samia Hurst14, Grischa Merkel15, Fruzsina Molnár-Gábor16, Jean-Marc Rickli17, James Scheibner18, Effy Vayena2, Rafael Yuste19, Philipp Kellmeyer20
1College of Humanities, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland
2Department of Health Sciences and Technologies, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
3New York Presbyterian Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
4Institute of Humanities in Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
5Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA
6Institute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
7Department of International Law and Ethics of Law, Law Faculty, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
8Faculty of Law and Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
9Neuromedical AI Lab, Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
10Privatics Group, INRIA, Paris, France
11ZHAW School of Engineering, IEEE Standards Association; Confederation of Laboratories for AI Research in Europe (CLAIRE), Winterthur, Switzerland
12Centre de Recherche Neuroscience Paris Seine, CNRS; UNESCO Chair of Bioethics, Paris, France
13Institute for Philosophy, FernUniversität in Hagen, Hagen, Germany
14Institute for Ethics, History, and the Humanities, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
15Department of Police Sciences, University of Applied Sciences for Administration and Services Kiel-Altenholz, Altenholz, Germany
16Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Heidelberg, Germany
17Geneva Center for Security Policy, Geneva, Switzerland
18College of Business, Government and Law, Flinders University, Bedford Park, Australia
19The NeuroTechnology Center, Columbia University, New York, USA
20Human-Technology Interaction Lab, Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany

Tóm tắt

The increasing availability of brain data within and outside the biomedical field, combined with the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to brain data analysis, poses a challenge for ethics and governance. We identify distinctive ethical implications of brain data acquisition and processing, and outline a multi-level governance framework. This framework is aimed at maximizing the benefits of facilitated brain data collection and further processing for science and medicine whilst minimizing risks and preventing harmful use. The framework consists of four primary areas of regulatory intervention: binding regulation, ethics and soft law, responsible innovation, and human rights.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Insel, T.R. 2017. Digital phenotyping: Technology for a new science of behavior. JAMA 318 (13): 1215–1216. Ienca, M., P. Haselager, and E.J. Emanuel. 2018. Brain leaks and consumer neurotechnology. Nature Biotechnology 36 (9): 805–810. Wang Y, S. Hong, C. Tai. 2019. China’s Efforts to Lead the Way in AI Start in Its Classrooms. The Wall Street Journal [published Online First: Oct. 24, 2019]. Chen, S. 2018. Forget the Facebook leak’: China is mining data directly from workers’ brains on an industrial scale. South China Morning Post 29. Emondi, A. 2019. Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology: DARPA. Link: https://www.darpa.mil/program/nextgeneration-nonsurgical-neurotechnology. Ienca, M., F. Jotterand, and B.S. Elger. 2018. From healthcare to warfare and reverse: How should we regulate dual-use neurotechnology? Neuron 97 (2): 269–274. Frégnac, Y. 2017. Big data and the industrialization of neuroscience: A safe roadmap for understanding the brain? Science 358 (6362): 470–477. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan8866. Landhuis, E. 2017. Neuroscience: Big brain, big data. Nature 541 (7638): 559–561. https://doi.org/10.1038/541559a. Yuste, R., and C. Bargmann. 2017. Toward a global BRAIN initiative. Cell 168 (6): 956–959. Grillner, S., N. Ip, C. Koch, et al. 2016. Worldwide initiatives to advance brain research. Nature neuroscience 19 (9): 1118–1122. Castelluccia, C. 2020. From Dataveillance to Datapulation : The Dark Side of Targeted Persuasive Technologies. Preprint. Available at: https://hal.inria.fr/hal-02904926/ Price, W.N., and I.G. Cohen. 2019. Privacy in the age of medical big data. Nature Medicine 25 (1): 37. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0272-7. Zhou, L., S. Pan, J. Wang, et al. 2017. Machine learning on big data: Opportunities and challenges. Neurocomputing 237: 350–361. Kellmeyer, P. 2018. Big Brain Data: On the Responsible Use of Brain Data from Clinical and Consumer-Directed Neurotechnological Devices. Neuroethics 1–16. Wolkenstein, A., R.J. Jox, and O. Friedrich. 2018. Brain–computer interfaces: Lessons to be learned from the ethics of algorithms. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27 (4): 635–646. Kellmeyer, P. 2020. Ethical issues in the application of machine learning to brain disorders. In Machine learning, eds. Mechelli A, Vieira S., 329–42. Academic Press. Poldrack, R.A. 2011. Inferring mental states from neuroimaging data: From reverse inference to large-scale decoding. Neuron 72 (5): 692–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2011.11.001 [published Online First: 2011/12/14]. Marshel, J.H., Y.S. Kim, T.A. Machado, et al. 2019. Cortical layer-specific critical dynamics triggering perception. Science 365 (6453): eaaw5202. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw5202. Carrillo-Reid, L., S. Han, W. Yang, et al. 2019. Controlling Visually Guided Behavior by Holographic Recalling of Cortical Ensembles. Cell 178 (2): 447–57 e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.045. Kay, K.N., T. Naselaris, R.J. Prenger, et al. 2008. Identifying natural images from human brain activity. Nature 452 (7185): 352–355. Horikawa, T., M. Tamaki, Y. Miyawaki, et al. 2013. Neural decoding of visual imagery during sleep. Science 340 (6132): 639. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1234330. Moses, D.A., M.K. Leonard, J.G. Makin, et al. 2019. Real-time decoding of question-and-answer speech dialogue using human cortical activity. Nature Communications 10 (1): 3096. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10994-4. Hubbard, J., A. Kikumoto, and U. Mayr. 2019. EEG decoding reveals the strength and temporal dynamics of goal-relevant representations. Scientific Reports 9 (1): 9051. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45333-6. Omurtag, A., H. Aghajani, and H.O. Keles. 2017. Decoding human mental states by whole-head EEG+fNIRS during category fluency task performance. Journal of Neural Engineering 14 (6): 066003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/aa814b [published Online First: 2017/07/22]. Faurholt-Jepsen, M., J. Busk, M. Frost, et al. 2016. Voice analysis as an objective state marker in bipolar disorder. Translational Psychiatry 6 (7): e856–e956. https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2016.123. Gordon, B.A., T.M. Blazey, Y. Su, et al. 2018. Spatial patterns of neuroimaging biomarker change in individuals from families with autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease: A longitudinal study. The Lancet Neurology 17 (3): 241–250. Wexler, A., and P.B. Reiner. 2019. Oversight of direct-to-consumer neurotechnologies. Science 363 (6424): 234. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav0223. Glanz, O., J. Derix, R. Kaur, et al. 2018. Real-life speech production and perception have a shared premotor-cortical substrate. Scientific Reports 8 (1): 8898. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26801-x. Koch, C., M. Massimini, M. Boly, et al. 2016. Neural correlates of consciousness: Progress and problems. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 17 (5): 307. Bauer, P.J., T. Pathman, C. Inman, et al. 2017. Neural correlates of autobiographical memory retrieval in children and adults. Memory 25 (4): 450–466. Greenberg, A. 2019. Inside the mind’s eye: An international perspective on data privacy law in the age of brain machine interfaces. 29: 79. Schwarz, C.G., W.K. Kremers, T.M. Therneau, et al. 2019. Identification of anonymous MRI research participants with face-recognition software. New England Journal of Medicine 381 (17): 1684–1686. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1908881. Chizeck. H. J., T. Bonaci. 2014. Brain-Computer Interface Anonymizer. Patent Number: US20140228701A1. Rainey, S., K. McGillivray, S. Akintoye, et al. 2020. Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? Journal of Law and the Biosciences; 7(1):lsaa051 https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa051. Obar, J.A., and A. Oeldorf-Hirsch. 2020. The biggest lie on the internet: Ignoring the privacy policies and terms of service policies of social networking services. Information, Communication & Society 23 (1): 128–147. Vayena, E., A. Mastroianni, and J. Kahn. 2013. Caught in the web: informed consent for online health research. Science Translational Medicine 5 (173): 173fs6. Goering, S., and R. Yuste. 2016. On the necessity of ethical guidelines for novel neurotechnologies. Cell 167 (4): 882–885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.10.029. Eaton, M.L., and J. Illes. 2007. Commercializing cognitive neurotechnology—the ethical terrain. Nature biotechnology 25 (4): 393–397. Dasgupta, I. 2020. Assessing current mechanisms for the regulation of direct-to-consumer neurotechnology. In Developments in neuroethics and bioethics, 233–65. Elsevier. OECD-Council. 2019. OECD Recommendation on Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/science/recommendation-on-responsible-innovation-inneurotechnology.htm. Baselga-Garriga, C., P. Rodriguez, and R. Yuste. 2022. Neuro rights: A human rights solution to ethical issues of neurotechnologies, 157–161. Protecting the Mind: Springer. Voeneky, S. 2020. Implementation and enforcement of international humanitarian law. In The handbook of international humanitarian law, ed. Fleck D, 4th ed, 647–700. EGE. 2016. Opinion on the ethical implications of new health technologies and citizen participation: European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. Available at: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/e86c21fa-ef2f-11e5-8529-01aa75ed71a1. Kuehn, B.M. 2013. Groups experiment with digital tools for patient consent. JAMA 310 (7): 678–680. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.194643. IEEE. 2020. Standards Roadmap: Neurotechnologies for Brain-Machine Interfacing, 1–100. IEEE. Yuste, R., S. Goering, G. Bi, et al. 2017. Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI. Nature News 551 (7679): 159. Ienca, M., and R. Andorno. 2017. Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 13 (1): 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1 [published Online First: 2017/04/27]. Ienca, M. 2021. On neurorights. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15. Herrera-Ferrá, K., J. M. Muñoz, H. Nicolini, et al. 2022. Contextual and cultural perspectives on neurorights: Reflections toward an international consensus. AJOB Neuroscience 1–9. Kellmeyer, P. 2022. Neurorights: A Human-Rights Based Approach for Governing Neurotechnologies. In The Cambridge Handbook of Responsible Artificial Intelligence - Interdisciplinary Perspectives. 1st ed: Cambridge University Press. Sen, A. 2005. Human rights and capabilities. Journal of Human Development 6 (2): 151–166.
Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Neuroethics

Tập 15

1-14

Thông tin tác giả