Neurology®
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed Neurology journal
Quick Search
Advanced Search
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correspondence:
Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Correspondence are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Illes, J.
Right arrow Articles by Atlas, S. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Illes, J.
Right arrow Articles by Atlas, S. W.
Related Collections
Right arrow All Imaging
Right arrow MRI
Right arrow All Ethics in Neurology/Legal issues
NEUROLOGY 2004;62:888-890
© 2004 American Academy of Neurology

Ethical consideration of incidental findings on adult brain MRI in research

J. Illes, PhD, A. C. Rosen, PhD, L. Huang, MD, R. A. Goldstein, MD, T. A. Raffin, MD, G. Swan, PhD and S. W. Atlas, MD

From the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics (Drs. Illes and Raffin), Departments of Medicine (Drs. Illes and Raffin), Radiology (Drs. Illes, Huang, Goldstein, and Atlas), and Neurology and Neurological Sciences (Dr. Rosen), and the Hoover Institution (Dr. Atlas), Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA; and SRI International (Dr. Swan), Menlo Park, CA.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Judy Illes, Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, 701 Welch Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304-5748; e-mail: illes{at}stanford.edu

Objective: To characterize the frequency and severity of incidental findings in brain MRIs of young and older adult research volunteers, and to provide an evaluation of the ethical challenges posed by the detection of such findings.

Methods: The authors reviewed 151 research MRI scans obtained retrospectively from subjects recruited to studies as healthy volunteers. Incidental findings were classified into four categories: no referral, routine, urgent, or immediate referral. p Values for significance were computed from {chi}2 tests of contingency.

Results: Of 151 studies, the authors found an overall occurrence of incidental findings having required referral of 6.6%. By age, there were more findings in the older cohort (aged >60 years) than in the younger cohort (p < 0.05) and in more men than women in the older cohort (p < 0.001). Three of four (75%) findings in the younger cohort were classified in the urgent referral category; 100% of the findings in the older cohort were classified as routine (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: The significant presence but different characteristics of incidental findings in young and older subjects presumed to be neurologically healthy suggest that standards of practice are needed to guide investigators in managing and communicating their discovery.

Received November 17, 2003. Accepted in final form January 5, 2004.

See also page 849




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Med. EthicsHome page
N Hoggard, G Darwent, D Capener, I D Wilkinson, and P D Griffiths
The high incidence and bioethics of findings on magnetic resonance brain imaging of normal volunteers for neuroscience research
J. Med. Ethics, March 1, 2009; 35(3): 194 - 199.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
D.A. Brown and A.N. Hasso
Toward a Uniform Policy for Handling Incidental Findings in Neuroimaging Research
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., September 1, 2008; 29(8): 1425 - 1427.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Law Med EthicsHome page
J. M. Royal and B. S. Peterson
The risks and benefits of searching for incidental findings in MRI research scans.
J. Law Med. Ethics, June 1, 2008; 36(2): 305 - 314.
[PDF]

Home page
 J Law Med EthicsHome page
C. A. Nelson
Incidental findings in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain research.
J. Law Med. Ethics, June 1, 2008; 36(2): 315 - 319.
[PDF]

Home page
 J Law Med EthicsHome page
B. S. Wilfond and K. J. Carpenter
Incidental findings in pediatric research.
J. Law Med. Ethics, June 1, 2008; 36(2): 332 - 340.
[PDF]

Home page
 J Law Med EthicsHome page
A. C. Milstein
Research malpractice and the issue of incidental findings.
J. Law Med. Ethics, June 1, 2008; 36(2): 356 - 360.
[PDF]

Home page
 JNMHome page
F. W. Floeth, M. Sabel, G. Stoffels, D. Pauleit, K. Hamacher, H.-J. Steiger, and K.-J. Langen
Prognostic Value of 18F-Fluoroethyl-L-Tyrosine PET and MRI in Small Nonspecific Incidental Brain Lesions
J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2008; 49(5): 730 - 737.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
J. Illes, M. P. Kirschen, E. Edwards, P. Bandettini, M. K. Cho, P. J. Ford, G. H. Glover, J. Kulynych, R. Macklin, D. B. Michael, et al.
Practical approaches to incidental findings in brain imaging research
Neurology, January 29, 2008; 70(5): 384 - 390.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
H. H. Alphs, B. S. Schwartz, W. F. Stewart, and D. M. Yousem
Findings on Brain MRI from Research Studies of Occupational Exposure to Known Neurotoxicants
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2006; 187(4): 1043 - 1047.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
R. I. Grossman and J. L. Bernat
Incidental research imaging findings: Pandora's costly box
Neurology, March 23, 2004; 62(6): 849 - 850.
[Full Text] [PDF]