ArticleNanoethics2025
Perception and reaction of undergraduate critical disability studies students to six short films depicting neuro-advancements.
Article in Nanoethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advancements in neurosciences and neurotechnologies pose various ethical and social challenges, warranting public/stakeholder engagement. Art, such as short films, can expose audiences to the social aspects of neuro-advancements. The 2019 BIO·FICTION Film Festival, for instance, examined how neurotechnologies shape society, the human body, and mind. Students are one important group of stakeholders, as they are expected to be critical thinkers and change agents. The lived reality of disabled people is impacted by neuro-advancements in many ways. Critical disability studies students are therefore key stakeholders, as their programs and courses encourage them to identify and address social challenges faced by disabled individuals. Therefore, they need to be able to evaluate the social impacts of neuro-advancements. Few studies exist that ascertain the views of critical disability studies students on the social impact of neuro-advancements. Our study sought to amplify the voices of critical disability studies students by analyzing the responses of 89 undergraduates from three courses to six top films from the BIO·FICTION festival. Conducted asynchronously due to COVID restrictions, students watched the films independently and responded to four guiding questions about: a) general thoughts about the films, b) their perceived impact on those watching, c) implications for their anticipated careers involving disabled people, and d) the social impact of neuro-advancements on disabled people. Our findings indicated that the topical (non-)fictional short films effectively prompted students to reflect on the social aspects of neuro-advancements and were well received. However, responses also indicated a need for follow-up discussions - virtual or in-person - to address questions about film content and deepen the discussion and class engagement. Such discussion setups could also inform film festivals aiming to raise awareness about the societal implications of emerging technologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.