Indicators and criteria of consciousness: ethical implications for the care of behaviourally unresponsive patients

A recently introduced list of operational indicators of consciousness, originally developed for challenging cases like non-human animals and artificial intelligence, may help address the high misdiagnosis rate among patients with disorders of consciousness. These indicators are particular capacities deduced from behavior, cognitive performance, or neural correlates, and they do not define a hard threshold for consciousness but allow graded inference based on consistency across indicators. Applying these indicators to disorders of consciousness could inspire new strategies for reducing misdiagnosis, establishing a gold standard for detecting consciousness, and refining the taxonomy of these disorders.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Abstract Background Assessing consciousness in other subjects, particularly in non-verbal and behaviourally disabled subjects (e.g., patients with disorders of consciousness), is notoriously challenging but increasingly urgent. The high rate of misdiagnosis among disorders of consciousness raises the need for new perspectives in order to inspire new technical and clinical approaches. Main body We take as a starting point a recently introduced list of operational indicators of consciousness that facilitates its recognition in challenging cases like non-human animals and Artificial Intelligence to explore their relevance to disorders of consciousness and their potential ethical impact on the diagnosis and healthcare of relevant patients. Indicators of consciousness mean particular capacities that can be deduced from observing the behaviour or cognitive performance of the subject in question (or from neural correlates of such performance) and that do not define a hard threshold in deciding about the presence of consciousness, but can be used to infer a graded measure based on the consistency amongst the different indicators. The indicators of consciousness under consideration offer a potential useful strategy for identifying and assessing residual consciousness in patients with disorders of consciousness, setting the theoretical stage for an operationalization and quantification of relevant brain activity. Conclusions Our heuristic analysis supports the conclusion that the application of the identified indicators of consciousness to its disorders will likely inspire new strategies for assessing three very urgent issues: the misdiagnosis of disorders of consciousness; the need for a gold standard in detecting consciousness and diagnosing its disorders; and the need for a refined taxonomy of disorders of consciousness.