Ethical and regulatory considerations for industry-academia partnerships in the research and commercialization of neurotechnologies: Insights from interviews with neuroethicists

Abstract: Neurotechnologies have noteworthy implications for health, mental privacy, autonomy, and identity. Research and commercialization of neurotechnologies often requires a collaborative partnership between academia and industry. Each entity brings unique expertise, resources, and connections. Yet, there are competing interests, values, and priorities between and within each of these sectors that, if not navigated responsibly, may unduly bias research decisions and put patients and research participants at risk, despite good intentions. Scientific priorities such as transparency, accountability, and openness can be at odds with commercial priorities, such as profitability, maintaining market share, and preserving trade secrets. Given the rapid development of neurotechnology research and limitations of existing regulations, engaging a diverse range of neurotechnology stakeholders to understand and address this complex web of influence is paramount.

As part of a NIH BRAIN Initiative-funded effort examining ethical and regulatory issues with industry-academia partnerships, we conducted in-depth interviews with 15 neuroethics scholars. Participants were asked about ethical (e.g., industry influence on research design and data sharing) and regulatory (e.g., limitations of existing policies) considerations and potential solutions. We will present findings from our thematic analysis with important ethical and regulatory implications for the neurotechnology industry, academic institutions, and researchers as industry-academia partnerships form and decisions are made that affect patients, research participants, and the quality of neurotechnology research. Common themes that emerged from interviews include unique challenges inherent to neurotechnologies, the need for transparent data management practices, mechanisms for effectively protecting patient interests, and revising existing regulations governing neurotechnology research and commercialization.