Pioneers in neurology: Abraham Myerson (1881–1948)

Africk, Benjamin N.; Richardson, Christopher J. K.; Zeidman, Lawrence A.

doi:10.1007/s00415-020-10066-4

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Neuroethics may be considered a branch of biomedical ethics that deals specifically with the ethical and philosophical issues raised by neuroscience research and clinical practice. [12][13][14][15][16][17] Insofar as neurologists are responsible for evaluating and managing conditions that could impact foundational capacities subserving human identity, experience, and interaction, the practice of neurology and allied fields is suffused with a particularly high concentration of sensitive philosophical and ethical issues. [18][19][20] Prior to the birth of neuroethics, bioethics more generally as a distinct academic field began in the United States in the 1960s in the shadow of the Nuremberg Trial, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, and other historical events that highlighted the need for greater ethical guidance and governance in medical practice and research.…”

Section: Neuroethics In Teleneurology: Historical and Conceptual Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Neuroethics may be considered a branch of biomedical ethics that deals specifically with the ethical and philosophical issues raised by neuroscience research and clinical practice. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Insofar as neurologists are responsible for evaluating and managing conditions that could impact foundational capacities subserving human identity, experience, and interaction, the practice of neurology and allied fields is suffused with a particularly high concentration of sensitive philosophical and ethical issues. 18 19 20…”

Section: Neuroethics In Teleneurology: Historical and Conceptual Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neuroethics in the Era of Teleneurology

Young

2022

Semin Neurol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accelerating integration of telehealth technologies in neurology practice has transformed traditional interactions between neurologists and patients, allied clinicians and society. Despite the immense promise of these technologies to improve systems of neurological care, the infusion of telehealth technologies into neurology practice introduces a host of unique ethical challenges. Proactive consideration of the ethical dimensions of teleneurology and of the impact of these innovations on the field of neurology more generally can help to ensure responsible development and deployment across stages of implementation. Toward these ends, this article explores key ethical dimensions of teleneurology practice and policy, presents a normative framework for their consideration, and calls attention to underexplored questions ripe for further study at this evolving nexus of teleneurology and neuroethics. To promote successful and ethically resilient development of teleneurology across diverse contexts, clinicians, organizational leaders, and information technology specialists should work closely with neuroethicists with the common goal of identifying and rigorously assessing the trajectories and potential limits of teleneurology systems.

show abstract