Chen Bryan B, Haeusermann Tobias, Dada Abraham, Hamilton Roy H, James Jennifer E, Fong Kristina Celeste, Dohan Daniel, Chiong Winston
Memory and Aging Center (Chen, Haeusermann, Dada, Fong, Chiong), School of Nursing (James), and Institute for Health Policy Studies (Dohan), University of California, San Francisco; Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (Hamilton).
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2025 Winter;37(1):79-87. doi: 10.1176/appi.neuropsych.20230190. Epub 2024 Aug 22.
Responsive and human-centered neurotechnology development requires attention to public perceptions, particularly among groups underserved by existing treatments.
The authors conducted a preregistered nationally representative survey (https://osf.io/ej9h2) using the NORC at the University of Chicago AmeriSpeak panel. One vignette compared an implanted neural device with surgical resection in a scenario involving epilepsy, and another compared an implanted neural device with medications in a scenario involving mood disorders. The survey also contained questions about respondents' confidence that a device would be available if needed and confidence that enough research has been conducted among people like themselves. Responses were entered into nested survey-weighted logistic regression models, including a base demographic model (to test the overall effect of demographic factors) and an adjusted model that also included socioeconomic, religious and political, and health care access predictors.
A total of 1,047 adults responded to the survey, which oversampled Black non-Hispanic (N=214), Hispanic (N=210), and rural (N=219) Americans. In the base demographic model, older Americans were more likely to prefer an implanted device in the two scenarios, and non-Hispanic Black Americans were less likely than non-Hispanic White Americans to prefer a device; rural Americans were less confident than urban or suburban Americans in having access, and non-Hispanic Black and rural Americans were less confident that enough research has been conducted among people like themselves. In adjusted models, income was a key mediator, partially explaining the effect of age and the contrast between Black and White non-Hispanic respondents on preferences for a device in the epilepsy scenario and fully explaining the effect of rurality on confidence in access.
Demographic differences in prospective preferences and concerns highlight the importance of including members of underserved communities in neurotechnology development.
响应式且以人为本的神经技术开发需要关注公众认知，尤其是在现有治疗服务不足的群体中。
作者使用芝加哥大学NORC的美国民意调查小组进行了一项预先注册的全国代表性调查（https://osf.io/ej9h2）。一个情景描述将植入式神经装置与癫痫手术切除进行了比较，另一个情景描述将植入式神经装置与情绪障碍药物治疗进行了比较。该调查还包含了关于受访者对设备在需要时是否可得的信心以及对像他们自己这样的人群是否进行了足够研究的信心的问题。将回答纳入嵌套的调查加权逻辑回归模型，包括一个基础人口统计学模型（以测试人口统计学因素的总体影响）和一个调整模型，该模型还包括社会经济、宗教和政治以及医疗保健可及性预测因素。
共有1047名成年人对调查做出了回应，该调查对非西班牙裔黑人（N = 214）、西班牙裔（N = 210）和农村美国人（N = 219）进行了过度抽样。在基础人口统计学模型中，美国老年人在这两种情景中更倾向于选择植入式设备，而非西班牙裔黑人比非西班牙裔白人更不太可能选择设备；农村美国人比城市或郊区美国人对获得设备的信心更低，非西班牙裔黑人和农村美国人对像他们自己这样的人群是否进行了足够研究的信心更低。在调整模型中，收入是一个关键中介因素，部分解释了年龄的影响以及非西班牙裔黑人和白人受访者在癫痫情景中对设备偏好的差异，并完全解释了农村地区对获得设备信心的影响。
预期偏好和担忧方面的人口统计学差异凸显了在神经技术开发中纳入服务不足社区成员的重要性。
