Authors: Jess Snyder & Cailee NelsonDuring this week’s lab meeting, the B-RAD Lab engaged in a thoughtful discussion on emerging research in neuroscience. More specifically, we talked about a study that explored the use of psychedelic drugs to treat participants with post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. To guide our discussion, we read a recent article by Jane Palmer that described the use of psychedelic drugs in controlled therapeutic settings to treat PTSD. The article outlined the potential benefits as well as the concerns surrounding this approach. A benefit was that the study found psychedelic therapy to be more effective on participants who did not respond to traditional therapies as well. A potential concern was that more research needs to be done for this study to get effective results. The article also explained how the mechanisms by which psychedelics may alter the neural circuits responsible for the fear response associated with PTSD. Using this study as a guide, we discussed how this article may contribute to our understanding of inclusivity more broadly.
First, we talked about whether the specific use of psychedelic-assisted therapy for individuals with PTSD makes treatment more inclusive or more restrictive. If this treatment were to become legalized in the United States, it would likely remain highly regulated and only be administered in supervised clinical settings with extensive safety protocols. We referenced back to a previous lab discussion topic on stigma, thinking about how this treatment structure challenges the societal stigma around psychedelics and their recreational use. The stigma behind psychedelic drugs and their use is that they are frowned upon due to misconceptions on safety and addictiveness which stems back to the War on Drugs era. We also referenced a documentary called How to Change Your Mind which featured an episode highlighting the use of MDMA, commonly known as ecstasy, for psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. This is another piece of media that challenges drug-related stigma. Ultimately, we agreed as a group that if a treatment meaningfully alleviates suffering and restores a person’s sense of self, it warrants serious consideration for medical use. Psychedelic-assisted therapy aims to address root causes of trauma rather than managing symptoms, which may offer advantages over traditional pharmacological approaches. In this sense, it could expand treatment possibilities for individuals who have not responded to traditional treatments. At the same time, our discussion emphasized that even if psychedelic treatment is beneficial, it is not always accessible to everyone. We found that even though psychedelic drugs are not expensive, psychedelic-assisted therapy definitely is. With a treatment plan that requires trained clinicians, preparation, regulation, and lots of time, costs can be upward of $11,000 per course of treatment. With this, we realized that psychedelic-assisted therapy may not be inclusive of individuals from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. We acknowledged that many individuals with PTSD come from marginalized communities that already face systemic barriers to accessing mental health care. In these cases, psychedelic-assisted therapy could reinforce health disparities if access is limited to individuals with higher socioeconomic status. Ultimately, we recognized that a treatment can be both inclusive by expanding possibilities in the medical field while also being exclusive and inaccessible to others. Importantly, this conversation led to a reflection on our own research practices here at the B-RAD Lab. All of our studies operate within the boundaries that are defined by study-specific research questions and participant criteria. For example, some of our studies may exclude participants who cannot meet certain communication requirements as the research is specifically focused on understanding how individuals communicate. Additionally, some of our studies may exclude participants who are not in a specific age range as a lot of our research currently focuses on adolescents. These boundaries are often study-specific rather than lab-specific and are designed to answer a precise research question. At the same time, we discussed the importance of actively working towards greater inclusivity. One recent way we have done this is by dedicating part of our lab meeting to reworking our diversity and inclusion statement to ensure it aligns with our current practices and our continued commitment to fostering an inclusive and respectful research environment. Psychedelic-assisted therapy, like much of neuroscience research, illustrates that inclusion is not a static achievement but an ongoing process. As a lab, we acknowledge that we are responsible for continuously examining where our work expands access and where it may unintentionally create barriers.
0 Comments
Authors: Jackson McFadden & Liv MaceThis week, the B-RAD lab discussed the importance of protecting both research participants and research staff from emotionally distressing subject matter during active data collection and analysis. To what extent should we aim to structure such work to protect the very people most vulnerable to adverse outcomes? To what extent should we as professionals be prepared to engage in difficult conversations and heavy subject matter?
A 2025 article by Kennedy et al., proposed the idea that emotionally safe research begins at the development stage. The GENDER-Q Youth is a participant-response outcome measure (PROM) that investigates gender diverse youth and adolescents’ experiences regarding receiving gender affirming care. Given the potentially sensitive nature of these topics, the research team took considerable care to construct their interviews to bilaterally protect both participants and their sensitivities and the research team and their own. Examples of such considerations follow: “Does the [research] team require any training or resources to recognize and manage potential emotional safety concerns?”, “What are the potential threats to participants/research team’s privacy and safety during the recruitment process?”, “Are interviews being scheduled when the participant and team would have access to further necessary support?” Lastly, the team inquired about the potential for troubling emotional events regarding data analysis and potential qualitative coding of sensitive topics. While thought-provoking, the B-RAD team offered interesting points both in support and in dissent of the perspective shared by the article's authors. Researchers always possess the ability to be more mindful of the construction of tasks and procedures in such a way as to encourage healthy boundaries and support chains. On the other hand, it was argued that it is unrealistic to expect professionals in mental health adjacent fields to entirely “flowchart away” the very real difficult conversations and emotions that can arise when discussing sensitive topics or even not-so-sensitive topics. It is important to recall that all participants’ lives are rich and colorful and sometimes those colors can be dark. As people-facing researchers, there is an understanding that we should expect that some interactions will not be so positive. Even in the face of someone having a hard day, we should be prepared to hear those worries, sympathize, and move forward in a supportive manner. Another point made by the B-RAD lab is that protocol can certainly help in times of escalated emotion or threats to safety. It was noted that the GENDER-Q PROM framework was specifically designed for the context of virtual interviews, which may pose distinct difficulties to in-person interactions. There certainly exists a possibility that team members may face difficult encounters, discrimination, or even participant health crises. In this case, research teams should exercise caution that staff, administrators, and research assistants have received ample training on how, who, and when to report an incident with a participant. As it appears, the responsibility of the research team is many-fold: to protect data, lab staff, and certainly research participants. Ultimately, protections against emotionally distressing subjects may not always be eliminating chances for such topics to present themselves, but fostering an environment where honest answers are met with warm but professional concern if necessary, and researchers are appropriately equipped to understand when it is time to be the supporting force, and when it is time to seek support. References: Kennedy, S.L., Jack, S.M., Johnson, N. et al. Prioritizing Participant and Research Team Emotional Safety During Data Generation and Analysis in Qualitative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Research: Development of a Framework Informed by the GENDER-Q Youth Study. Patient 18, 597–608 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-025-00756-4 Authors: Veronica du Plessis & Liv MaceAttention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a very well-known diagnosis, having garnered a lot of attention and research over time. Even so, most people hold the perspective of ADHD being purely hyperactive in nature, often overlooking the inattentive element of the neurodevelopmental disorder. Hyperactivity is more easily observable and more common in males than in females, while predominantly inattentive ADHD (ADHD-PI) is more common in females. In fact, the ratio for diagnosis between males and females is 4:1. This is due to the neglect of inattention as a presentation of ADHD, thus resulting in females being overlooked when it comes to ADHD diagnoses. Karley Dobronski, a college-age female, shared her personal story through a TEDTalk titled “Invisible struggle of ADHD in women and girls”. In this talk, she spoke of her own personal experience in which her ADHD was overlooked, until she was finally diagnosed in college. She had spent most of her life being treated for previously diagnosed depression and anxiety, feeling as though something was inherently wrong with her, and she was the reason behind her academic challenges. She noted how others recognized her symptoms but misattributed them as personality traits, labeling her as quiet, disorganized, careless, and airheaded. She discussed how her diagnosis of ADHD in college helped her recognize and accept her full, authentic self, in turn improving her self-esteem. Martin et al. (2024) further supported the observable gendered discrepancies in ADHD diagnoses, stating that females are diagnosed at a later age and often delayed in receiving ADHD stimulant medication. Furthermore, females were more likely to be diagnosed with co-occurring anxiety, depression, and other mental health diagnoses, often having been diagnosed before ever being considered for ADHD. Females were also more likely to receive antidepressant medication both at a younger age than males and before receiving a stimulant medication prescription (Martin et al., 2024). This aligns with points made by Dobronski, stating that the average age of ADHD diagnosis is seven in males and twelve in females. She also pointed out the tendency for females with ADHD to develop emotion-focused coping mechanisms, mood disorders, dysregulated eating, and higher rates of self-harm and suicide. These harrowing facts inspired our discussion, in which the validity of ADHD diagnostic criteria, the controversy between early and late diagnoses, and the debate between comorbidity of diagnoses or misdiagnoses were addressed. With the advent of co-occurring diagnoses being so prevalent in females with ADHD, the question arises whether these diagnoses are comorbid or perhaps the result of a misdiagnosis. The answer is not clear, as it depends on a multitude of factors. Historically, research on ADHD was founded on men, in turn dismissing female presentation due to lack of scientific inquiry on the topic. The consideration that biological predisposition to depression and anxiety is different from the neurodevelopmental nature of ADHD suggests that comorbidity is possible, if not likely. On the other hand, the advent of a misdiagnosis and living with unsupported ADHD could have a causal effect on depression and anxiety, either developing or heightening the presentation of the diagnosis due to added environmental stressors and the debilitating internalization of the symptoms. These effects push for the need of earlier diagnosis, as it could prevent further decline in mental health. However, the question of how early arises. In addressing this, one must recognize that a diagnosis is separate from an intervention. The ideal pathway is to begin with a diagnosis, followed by behavioral interventions and parental management training. Following this, medication can be introduced, slowly increasing dosage if needed while continuously reinforcing behavioral management techniques. Finally, one wonders what can be done to address and diminish this gendered discrepancy in ADHD diagnosis. We agreed that education is key. Approaching an ADHD diagnosis is most effective from a holistic and intersectional lens, considering all types of ADHD that may be present and understanding where symptoms interfere, especially contextually. By continuously raising awareness and increasing education, we can generate a new generation of competent care providers. References Dobronski, K. (2025, March). Invisible struggle of ADHD in women and girls [Video]. TED Conferences. https://youtu.be/Px_EPsMt71Y?si=vYVFVxzB-DQy6qpm Martin, J., Langley, K., Cooper, M., Rouquette, O. Y., John, A., Sayal, K., Ford, T., & Thapar, A. (2024). Sex differences in attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder diagnosis and clinical care: A national study of population healthcare records in wales. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13987 Authors: Wae Man Chan, Veronica du Plessis, & Liv MaceOur recent discussion focused on an article titled “Diagnostic Overshadowing: A Delayed Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder in a Child who is Deaf,” which highlighted the concern of how similar and overlapping traits between autism and hearing loss can lead to a delay in accurate diagnoses. When clinicians attribute behaviors to only hearing impairment, characteristics of autism can be overlooked, leading to the missed opportunity for early support and intervention.
Why Diagnostic Overshadowing Happens: Diagnostic overshadowing can occur when symptoms of a pre-existing diagnosis actually reflect a separate condition. In healthcare, this can often affect individuals that present complex symptoms, such as co-occurring developmental delays, seizures, or sensory impairments. Clinicians may focus more on the most urgent or visible symptoms, such as hearing loss or seizure activity, rather than evenly assessing all the symptoms. In addition, not all diagnostic tools are adapted for people with multiple disabilities. For instance, standard assessments for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may not accurately consider those that may be deaf or use sign language, since many assume spoken communication is the norm. Social cues in sign language, such as facial expression and eye contact, may carry different meanings than in spoken language, yet these distinctions are often unaccounted for in standardized tools like the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS). Overlapping Signs of Autism versus Hearing Loss: Some traits of ASD and children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) can be similarly presented. For example, differences in prosody, the pattern of rhythm or melody of speech, are common in both groups. This means that an individual who is deaf or hard of hearing may verbally communicate using a “deaf accent,” which might be mistaken for a speech pattern consistent with autism. Traditional diagnostic tools present another barrier. Assessments like the ADOS were developed with the assumption that those being evaluated did not have any hearing issues. They rarely consider sign language, interpreters, or alternative forms of communication. This lack of adaptation can lead to inaccurate evaluations and contribute to a lack of understanding of varying forms of social communication. The Impact of a Delayed Diagnosis: A delayed diagnosis of autism can socially, academically, and emotionally affect a child in almost every aspect of life. Without the recognition of their autistic traits, a child may feel misunderstood when in reality they need accommodation and support. Early identification allows families and educators to personalize interventions, including sensory supports and structured learning environments, further supporting autistic children to succeed and feel understood. How to Move Toward Better Diagnosis and Care: To work on reducing diagnostic overshadowing, clinicians need more inclusive diagnostic tools and broader training. Assessments must be adapted to account for co-occurring conditions, especially when differences in communication can play a significant role. Collaborations between audiologists, psychologists, and educators will help contribute to an integrated and coordinated approach that assesses the child as a whole person rather than a collection of varying symptoms. Lastly, education is equally important as clinicians must be trained to recognize the diversity of neurodevelopmental changes and how they can be presented across a spectrum. Clinicians should remain curious, reflective, and open to learning. Ultimately, collaboration is key in leading to better outcomes for many individuals. References: Dang, Q.-C., Hoffman, M., & St. John, R. (2024). Diagnostic overshadowing: A delayed diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder in a deaf child. Journal of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention, 9(1), 17–21. https://doi.org/10.26077/ed17-2a01 Authors: Cailee Nelson and Britney DonovanThis week the B-RAD lab compared how different neuroimaging modalities (e.g., electroencephalography, functional near-infrared spectroscopy) are inclusive of minoritized populations, particularly individuals with afro-textured hair. More specifically, our discussion was centered around a recorded webinar from NIRx, a leading functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) company, that presented research findings from a study focused on improving inclusivity of individuals with afro-textured hair. fNIRS, like electroencephalography (EEG), situates a cap fitted with optodes over a participant’s head. Unlike EEG, however, fNIRS shines infrared light on the scalp which is absorbed by hemoglobin in the brain. Depending on the amount of light absorbed, researchers can determine how certain brain regions were activated during a task. As such, fNIRS data quality can be impacted by hair thickness and texture, hair color, and skin color. Therefore, individuals with thicker hair, afro-textured hair, and darker skin tones are excluded from fNIRS studies more often than individuals with thinner, lighter hair and lighter skin tones. The webinar first touched on how fNIRS research under-reports demographic information and reasons for excluding individuals. For example, many studies report excluding participants due to poor data quality which could be problematic if they are systematically excluding participants of color. Additionally, the webinar demonstrated how interventions like cornrowing hair can improve fNIRS inclusivity for individuals with afro-textured hair. As a group, we determined that an overall solution to improving inclusivity in fNIRS research and neuroscience research, more generally, is to design neuroimaging technology in a way that is inclusive of all races and ethnicities. However, given the number of resources it may take to improve technology, researchers should focus on shorter-term solutions they can immediately implement in their own lab (e.g., cornrowing hair, hiring hair specialists, compensating participants for hair care). While these shorter-term solutions may require researchers to extend the amount of time a participant is in a session and how they compensate participants, it is a necessary step toward repairing the rift between science and Black and other minority communities. These solutions will also allow researchers to include more representative samples in their studies—ultimately improving the quality of the science. |
AuthorB-RAD Lab Members all contribute to our articles. Archives
March 2026
Categories
All
|