Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42786235›Full record

ReviewNature neuroscience2026

Reconciling global collaboration and data sovereignty in neuroscience.

Kimberly L Ray, Marietjie Botes, Melanie Collier, Alden Yi, Steven Hershman, Thaís Monteiro, Mariana Genuino, Jean-Baptiste Poline, Damian Eke, Ricardo Chavarriaga and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The many interfaces of neurotechnology.Nature neuroscience · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Kimberly L RayDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1302-2834
Marietjie BotesDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
Melanie CollierDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
Alden YiDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
Steven HershmanDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9167-7380
Thaís MonteiroD'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Mariana GenuinoD'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jean-Baptiste PolineDepartment of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Damian EkeSchool of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Ricardo ChavarriagaCentre for Artificial Intelligence, Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8879-2860
Amadi Ogonda IhunwoSchool of Anatomical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1097-7424
Fernanda Tovar MollD'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0292-5985
Thomas E NicholsBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4516-5103
Franco PestilliDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA. pestilli@utexas.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2469-0494

Funding

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (NIH) NINDS U24NS140384U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (NIH) NINDS UM1NS132207Wellcome Trust (Wellcome) 226486/Z/22/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) elevates the economic and strategic value of data, governments are intensifying efforts to regulate the collection, use and cross-border transfer of personal information. Data are increasingly treated as national assets, subject to legal, economic and geopolitical controls. These shifts are reshaping scientific research, particularly in neuroscience and brain health, where progress depends on access to large, diverse and internationally distributed datasets. In parallel, advances in neuroimaging, neurotechnology and computational modeling are enabling population-scale neuroscience and the generation of AI-ready brain datasets. These developments further increase the strategic importance of neural data, amplifying both their scientific value and their governance complexity. The convergence of these trends exposes a fundamental tension between the need for an open science culture and data sovereignty. Without coordinated responses, these dynamics risk limiting representation, slowing innovation and reinforcing global inequities in brain health research. Here we argue that neuroscience requires an international data governance coordinating body capable of aligning research and regulatory priorities. In addition to outlining the distinct challenges posed by neural data, we propose strategies to support secure, equitable and sustainable global collaboration, as well as practical governance instruments to enable coordinated implementation across jurisdictions.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceInternational CooperationNeurosciencesAnimalsBrainHumans

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.