Remarkable comment in Nature Communications

Interfaces to the brain have already arrived in clinical practice applications. Results of research and human studies are widely shared on social media. The names used, such as “computer-brain interfaces”, were originally closely linked to the location and performance of the approaches.

Authors Ulrich G. Hofmann and Thomas Stieglitz argue for precise terminology when discussing neurotechnologies, in particular a distinction between “brain-computer interfaces” (BCIs) and “brain-machine interfaces” (BMIs). They point out the surgical risks and invasiveness associated with these technologies and emphasize that implantable systems (BMIs) differ significantly from non-invasive BCIs in terms of risks, performance and potential side effects. They advocate the use of different terms to better inform the public and provide safety and clarity in this area and suggest “iBCI” for invasive devices. This clarity is intended to increase public confidence and informed decision-making regarding neurotechnological advances