Abstract
While neurotechnology provides opportunities for novel mental health interventions, preferences of patients and the general public, and the reasons for their choices are still unclear. Here, we conducted a large-scale online survey with 785 participants, half of them suffering from psychiatric and/or neurological conditions. We asked about techniques ranging from invasive (pharmaceutical drugs and brain implants) to noninvasive approaches (ultrasound, magnetic, or electric stimulation). First, participants had a low level of prior knowledge but were interested and excited about these opportunities. Second, both patients and the general population preferred focused ultrasound stimulation (first choice) while drugs and implants were ranked 3rd and 5th out of five, respectively. Finally, that preference was mainly driven by whether they perceived a technology as safe, rather than as effective. Overall, this survey identifies safety as main criterion for interventions and shows a preference for novel noninvasive approaches such as focused ultrasound neuromodulation.
Highlights
Focused ultrasound is the preferred intervention for brain and mental health conditions
The preference of techniques was consistent between healthy participants and patients suffering from brain or mental health conditions.
Getting more information about different neuromodulation techniques reduced confusion and increased feelings of being excited, optimistic, and comfortable with these techniques
The ranking of preference is linked with the perceived safety but not with perceived efficiency of techniques indicating safety as more important criterion
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
M.K., C.A., and A.J. were supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/W004488/1 and EP/X01925X/1). M.K. was also supported by the Guangci Professorship Program of Rui Jin Hospital (Shanghai Jiao Tong University).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This online survey was approved by the University of Nottingham Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (FMHS 147-1022).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Extended Table 1 and additional statistical analysis.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
