Abstract
Patients who participate in intracranial neuroscience research make invaluable contributions to our understanding of the brain, accelerating the development of neurotechnological interventions. Engagement of patients as part of this research presents unique challenges, where study goals can be distant from immediate clinical applications and require specialized domain knowledge. Yet methods for meaningfully integrating patient communities as part of these research efforts is essential, as intracranial neuroscience guides the application of artificial intelligence for understanding and enhancing human cognition. In order to identify what patients consider meaningful research engagement we interviewed individuals who participated in a study during their Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) surgery and attended a group event where they interacted with our research team. Analysis of semi-structured interviews identified four main themes: interest in science and the future of clinical care, contributing to science to improve lives, connecting with others, and accessibility considerations. Based on these insights, we propose strategies for transformational participation of patient communities in intracranial neuroscience research with respect to engagement objectives, communication and scope. This approach offers a foundation for sustaining relationships between scientists and communities rooted in trust and transparency, to ensure that impacts of neurotechnology on human health and cognition are aligned with patient needs as well as desired public values.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by grants from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Award Number 5U01NS117836-05 (P.I. R. Richardson), and the National Institute of Mental Health, Award Number 5R01MH133657-02 (P.I. G. Lazáro-Muñoz).
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 study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Mass General Brigham Institutional Review Board (Protocol #2022P000223).
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
