Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain
Abstract. Pain, by definition, is a subjective experience, and as such its presence has usually been based on a self-report. However, limitations of self-reports for pain diagnostics, particularly for legal and insurance purposes, has led some to consider a brain-imaging–based objective measure of p...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wolters Kluwer
2016-10-01
|
Series: | PAIN Reports |
Online Access: | http://journals.lww.com/painrpts/fulltext/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000577 |
id |
doaj-00a76058cd054eb283ba7ba172aa7d35 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-00a76058cd054eb283ba7ba172aa7d352020-11-24T23:29:22ZengWolters KluwerPAIN Reports2471-25312016-10-0114e57710.1097/PR9.0000000000000577201610000-00003Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose painKaren D. Davis0Department of Surgery and Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto; Division of Brain, Imaging and Behaviour-Systems Neuroscience, Krembil Research Institute, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaAbstract. Pain, by definition, is a subjective experience, and as such its presence has usually been based on a self-report. However, limitations of self-reports for pain diagnostics, particularly for legal and insurance purposes, has led some to consider a brain-imaging–based objective measure of pain. This review will provide an overview of (1) differences between pain and nociception, (2) intersubject variability in pain perception and the associated brain structures and functional circuits, and (3) capabilities and limitations of current brain-imaging technologies. I then discuss how these factors impact objective proxies of pain. Finally, the ethical, privacy, and legal implications of a brain-imaging–based objective measure of pain are considered as potential future technological developments necessary to create a so-called “painometer test.”http://journals.lww.com/painrpts/fulltext/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000577 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Karen D. Davis |
spellingShingle |
Karen D. Davis Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain PAIN Reports |
author_facet |
Karen D. Davis |
author_sort |
Karen D. Davis |
title |
Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain |
title_short |
Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain |
title_full |
Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain |
title_fullStr |
Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain |
title_full_unstemmed |
Legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain |
title_sort |
legal and ethical issues of using brain imaging to diagnose pain |
publisher |
Wolters Kluwer |
series |
PAIN Reports |
issn |
2471-2531 |
publishDate |
2016-10-01 |
description |
Abstract. Pain, by definition, is a subjective experience, and as such its presence has usually been based on a self-report. However, limitations of self-reports for pain diagnostics, particularly for legal and insurance purposes, has led some to consider a brain-imaging–based objective measure of pain. This review will provide an overview of (1) differences between pain and nociception, (2) intersubject variability in pain perception and the associated brain structures and functional circuits, and (3) capabilities and limitations of current brain-imaging technologies. I then discuss how these factors impact objective proxies of pain. Finally, the ethical, privacy, and legal implications of a brain-imaging–based objective measure of pain are considered as potential future technological developments necessary to create a so-called “painometer test.” |
url |
http://journals.lww.com/painrpts/fulltext/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000577 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT karenddavis legalandethicalissuesofusingbrainimagingtodiagnosepain |
_version_ |
1725545999989997568 |