+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Brain health INnovation Diplomacy: a model binding diverse disciplines to manage the promise and perils of technological innovation

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Brain health diplomacy aims to influence the global policy environment for brain health (i.e. dementia, depression, and other mind/brain disorders) and bridges the disciplines of global brain health, international affairs, management, law, and economics. Determinants of brain health include educational attainment, diet, access to health care, physical activity, social support, and environmental exposures, as well as chronic brain disorders and treatment. Global challenges associated with these determinants include large-scale conflicts and consequent mass migration, chemical contaminants, air quality, socioeconomic status, climate change, and global population aging. Given the rapidly advancing technological innovations impacting brain health, it is paramount to optimize the benefits and mitigate the drawbacks of such technologies.


          We propose a working model of Brain health INnovation Diplomacy (BIND).


          We prepared a selective review using literature searches of studies pertaining to brain health technological innovation and diplomacy.


          BIND aims to improve global brain health outcomes by leveraging technological innovation, entrepreneurship, and innovation diplomacy. It acknowledges the key role that technology, entrepreneurship, and digitization play and will increasingly play in the future of brain health for individuals and societies alike. It strengthens the positive role of novel solutions, recognizes and works to manage both real and potential risks of digital platforms. It is recognition of the political, ethical, cultural, and economic influences that brain health technological innovation and entrepreneurship can have.


          By creating a framework for BIND, we can use this to ensure a systematic model for the use of technology to optimize brain health.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Int Psychogeriatr
          Int Psychogeriatr
          International psychogeriatrics
          8 July 2020
          13 February 2020
          August 2020
          19 September 2020
          : 32
          : 8
          : 955-979
          [1 ]School of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
          [2 ]U.S. Administration on Aging/Administration for Community Living, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, USA
          [3 ]Department of Psychiatry, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA
          [4 ]Memory and Aging Center, School of Medicine, UCSF, San Francisco, California, USA
          [5 ]Global Brain Health Institute, San Francisco, California, USA
          [6 ]Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
          [7 ]School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
          [8 ]Institute on Aging, School of Urban and Public Affairs, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA
          [9 ]Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina
          [10 ]National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina
          [11 ]Center for Social and Cognitive Neuroscience (CSCN), Universidad Adolfo Ibanez, Santiago, Chile
          [12 ]Universidad Autónoma del Caribe, Barranquilla, Colombia
          [13 ]ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Sydney, Australia
          [14 ]McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts, USA
          [15 ]Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
          [16 ]Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
          [17 ]McKnight Brain Institute and Department of Neurology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
          [18 ]Department of Brain Health, School of Integrated Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, UNLV, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
          [19 ]Division of Geriatrics, School of Medicine, UCSF, San Francisco, California, USA
          [20 ]Innovation Institute, Texas Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA
          [21 ]Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
          [22 ]IMPACT SRC, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
          [23 ]Brainstorm Laboratory for Mental Health Innovation, Department of Psychiatry, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
          [24 ]Discipline of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
          Author notes
          Correspondence should be addressed to: Dr Harris Eyre, MBBS, PhD, Innovation Institute, Texas Medical Center, Suite X, 2450 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, Texas, 77006, USA. harris.eyre@ 123456gmail.com .

          Description of authors’ roles

          HE and KT were responsible for formulating the review theme. HE, KT, VI, WD, AI, SD, and CP were responsible for designing the review paper. All authors were responsible for analyzing the data, writing, and extensively reviewing the paper.


          The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily of the authors’ organizations including the U.S. Administration on Aging/Administration for Community Living, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

          PMC7423685 PMC7423685 7423685 nihpa1609519


          Comment on this article