Reader comments to media reports on psychiatric neurosurgery: past history casts shadows on the future
- 101 Downloads
Comments made by readers in response to news articles about current events can provide profound insights into public understanding of and perspectives on those events. Here, in follow up to a paper published last year in this journal, we examined reader comments to articles in newspapers and magazines about neurosurgical interventions for treating psychiatric illness.
We conducted a thematic analysis of these comments (N = 662 coded units of data) posted in response to 115 newspaper and magazine articles from four countries (Canada, USA, Germany, and Spain) between 2006 and 2017. The comments were coded using an iteratively refined coding scheme that was structured around four a priori categories based on results from the parent study and two new categories that emerged.
We found many references to historical psychosurgery and mostly negative and pessimistic comments about ablative neurosurgical interventions. Comments to deep brain stimulation were more positive, and comments to optogenetics most controversial. We also found many expressions of distrust of medical professionals in the context of interventions on the brain and concerns about social and individual control.
Overall, results suggest there is still much work to be done to raise public awareness about re-emerging and new neurosurgical interventions. Balanced discussion is needed if these approaches are to find a place in health care for psychiatric disorders.
KeywordsPsychiatric neurosurgery Neuroethics Public perceptions
We would like to acknowledge the support from members of the ERA-NET NEURON psychiatric neurosurgery team, and Caitlin Courchesne (Neuroethics Canada) for the thoughtful comments on previous drafts.
ERA-NET NEURON Team Grant: Ethical, Legal and Social (ELS) Issues #ERN-144241 (JI) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany (01GP1621A) (SM). The sponsor had no role in the design or conduct of this research.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
- 4.Cabrera LY, Reiner PB (2015) Understanding public (mis)understanding of tDCS for enhancement. Frontiers in integrative Neuroscience 9 (art 30)Google Scholar
- 5.Cabrera LY, Bittlinger M, Lou H, Müller S, Illes J (2018) The re-emergence of psychiatric neurosurgery: insights from a cross-national study of newspaper and magazine coverage. Acta Neurochir 17(1):1–11Google Scholar
- 7.Craig DA (2011) Ethical language and themes in news coverage of genetic testing. J Mass Commun Q 77(1):160–174Google Scholar
- 9.European Commission (2013) Eurobarometer: responsible research and innovation (RRI), Science and Technology http://eceuropaeu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/ebs/ebs_401_enpdf Accessed 24 January 2018
- 10.Faridani S, Bitton E, Ryokai K, Goldberg K (2010) Opinion space: a scalable tool for browsing online comments. In: CHI '10, ACM press. ACM press, New York, New York, USA, p 1175Google Scholar
- 11.Gilbert F, Ovadia D (2011) Deep brain stimulation in the media: over-optimistic portrayals call for a new strategy involving journalists and scientists in ethical debates. Frontiers in integrative Neuroscience 5 (Art 16)Google Scholar
- 15.Müller S, Riedmüller R, van Oosterhout A (2015) Rivaling paradigms in psychiatric neurosurgery: adjustability versus quick fix versus minimal-invasiveness. Front Integr Neurosci 9(214):165Google Scholar
- 18.Pressman JD (1998) Last resort. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 23.Schläpfer TE, Lisanby SH, Pallanti S (2010) Separating hope from hype: some ethical implications of the development of deep brain stimulation in psychiatric research and treatment. Brain Stimul 15(5):285–287Google Scholar
- 24.Valenstein ES (1986) Great and desperate cures. Basic Books (AZ), Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
- 27.World Health Organization (2016) Investing in treatment for depression and anxiety leads to fourfold return. In: World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2016/depression-anxiety-treatment/en/. Accessed 24 Jan 2018
- 28.Wright KB (2005) Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. J Comput-Mediat Commun 10(3):1–19Google Scholar