Neurocritical Care in 2024: Where are We Headed?

Providing specialized care to critically ill neurology patients has improved outcomes for patients with neurological emergencies; however, there are still some gaps in neurocritical care (NCC) that offer opportunities for improvement. Among these gaps, improving education of the multidisciplinary NCC team, targeting individualized treatments for neurologically critically ill patients, and reducing disparities for undeserved patients as well as disadvantaged areas are priorities to advance the field. This review focuses on the current challenges neurointensivists face, including difficulties in neuroprognostication, ethical challenges in end-of-life care, and neuropalliative care.

Embracing variability in the search for biological mechanisms of psychiatric illness.

Despite decades of research, we lack objective diagnostic or prognostic biomarkers of mental health problems. A key reason for this limited progress is a reliance on the traditional case-control paradigm, which assumes that each disorder has a single cause that can be uncovered by comparing average phenotypic values of patient and control samples. Here, we discuss the problematic assumptions on which this paradigm is based and highlight recent efforts that seek to characterize, rather than minimize, the inherent clinical and biological variability that underpins psychiatric populations.

The Normative Power of Consent and Limits on Research Risks.

Research regulations around the world do not impose any limits on the risks to which consenting adults may be exposed. Nonetheless, most review committees regard some risks as too high, even for consenting adults. To justify this practice, commentators have appealed to a range of considerations which are external to informed consent and the risks themselves.