MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414976859 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2025.10.007

ITRUSST consensus on biophysical safety for transcranial ultrasound stimulation

2025· preprint· en· W4414976859 on OpenAlex
Jean‐François Aubry, David Attali, Mark E. Schafer, Elsa Fouragnan, Charles F. Caskey, Robert Chen, Ghazaleh Darmani, Ellen J. Bubrick, Jérôme Sallet, Christopher R. Butler, Charlotte J. Stagg, Miriam C. Klein-Flügge, Seung‐Schik Yoo, Christy K. Holland, Bradley E. Treeby, Eleanor Martin, Lennart Verhagen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilHORIZON EUROPE European Innovation CouncilNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringEuropean Research CouncilWellcome TrustFondation Bettencourt SchuellerBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNational Institute of Mental HealthBrigham Research InstituteNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUK Research and InnovationNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeFocused Ultrasound FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity of CincinnatiAdvanced Research and Invention AgencyNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekCitizens United for Research in EpilepsyHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeAgence Nationale de la RechercheEpilepsy FoundationFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsMechanical indexUltrasoundTranscranial DopplerIndex (typography)Set (abstract data type)Brain stimulationAdverse effectTranscranial direct-current stimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h2>Abstract</h2> Transcranial ultrasound stimulation (TUS) is an emerging technology for non-invasive brain stimulation. The International Transcranial Ultrasonic Stimulation Safety and Standards consortium (ITRUSST) has established consensus on considerations for nonsignificant biophysical risk of TUS, drawing upon the literature and established regulations for biomedical devices. Here, we assume the application of TUS to individuals without contraindications, compromised thermoregulation, vascular vulnerabilities, or administered ultrasound contrast agents. In this context, we present a concise yet comprehensive set of levels for nonsignificant risks of TUS application. For mechanical effects, it is non-significant risk if the mechanical index (MI) or the mechanical index for transcranial application (MI<sub>tc</sub>) does not exceed 1.9. For thermal effects, it is non-significant risk if any of the following three levels are met: the peak temperature rise does not exceed 2°C or the peak absolute temperature does not exceed 39°C, assuming a baseline temperature of 37°C, the thermal dose does not exceed 2 CEM43 in brain tissue, 16 CEM43 in bone tissue, and 21 CEM43 in skin tissue, or specific values of the thermal index (TI) for a given exposure time. This report reflects a consensus expert opinion and can inform, but not replace, regulatory guidelines or official international standards. Similarly, this consensus can inform, but not replace, ethical evaluation, which weighs the total burden, risks, and benefits of the proposed action. The stated levels are not safety limits per se, and further data is needed to establish the threshold for significant risk. We review literature relevant to our considerations and discuss limitations and future developments of our approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it