Harris Eyre, MD, PhD

Violence against women, which often results in 

 (TBI) and other acquired brain injuries (ABIs), has intensified during the COVID pandemic. Violence against women is a clear violation of human rights and a legal and moral failure of society. It likewise contributes to the brain health gap as well as presents as a major economic problem. As the world struggles to emerge from COVID-induced health and economic decline, women are a major key to the economic recovery. A comprehensive and long-term strategy is required to shed light on and address this dire issue and to ensure the mental well-being women as well as unlock the power of women to drive the economic recovery.

During July 2021, social media influencer Gabby Petito, aged 22, and her fiancé Brian Laundrie, aged 23, embarked from New York on a cross-country road trip captured on Instagram and YouTube.

 In September, Brian returned early from the trip—and alone. Weeks later, Gabby’s remains were found. It was determined that Gabby died from strangulation, and her case opened a national conversation about 

Tragically, Gabby’s case is just one of many. There has been an increase in IPV, illuminating a shadow pandemic within the COVID-19 pandemic.

, 1 in 3 women (approximately 1.27 billion individuals out of the 3.82 billion women in the world) are estimated to have experienced IPV.

 Further, more than one-third (30,000) of the women killed in 2017 were killed by their current or former intimate partner.

 COVID-19 has escalated the rates of IPV. Calls to helplines have increased five-fold in some countries in 2020.4In numerous countries, there has been a 300% increase in police reports of IPV, likely fueled by COVID-19 mitigation strategies.

 UN Women had projected that an additional 15 million women would be affected by IPV for every 3 months of lockdown.

Although this increase in violence will have multipronged effects, the neurological effects and IPV-related acquired brain injury (ABI), including Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), is particularly devastating. Despite the increasing attention in the last 10 years paid to sports-related TBI, little attention has been paid to TBI resulting from IPV.

 Up to 90% of survivors of IPV report head, neck, and face injuries, many of which result in TBI.

 One study examining brain injury in women who experienced IPV found that 74% of the women sustained at least one IPV-related TBI and 51% sustained repetitive IPV-related TBIs.11 Moreover, the study found a higher brain injury score from IPV was negatively associated with memory, learning, and cognitive flexibility and positively associated with a number of measures of psychological distress.

IPV-related ABI also includes nontraumatic brain injuries. Research has shown that 1 out of 10 women have been strangled by an intimate partner,

 which can cause a multitude of neurological problems, including hypoxic-anoxic brain injury, with long-term implications. As Gabby’s case emphasized, strangulation can result not just in hypoxic-anoxic brain injury but also in death. Indeed, prior non-fatal strangulation has been found to be associated with greater than 6-fold odds of becoming a victim of attempted homicide, and more than 7-fold odds of becoming a victim of completed homicide.

 The high-profile fatal strangulation murder of Gabby underscores femicide in IPV, which devastatingly remains commonplace.

In addition to TBI, hypoxic-anoxic brain injury, and other forms of acquired brain injury, women who experience IPV also are more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, suicidal ideation, and many other health problems that can last even after the violence has ended, potentially detaching them from the labor market.

There is also a growing concern that women who experience repeated TBIs from IPV may develop chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a progressive and fatal neurodegenerative disease that cannot be diagnosed until postmortem.

 Unfortunately, the literature tells their tales. For instance, a report from 1990 identified a case of a women who apparently developed CTE from partner abuse.

 In 2021, during a postmortem examination of a woman aged 29 who died following a domestic violence incident, immunohistochemical staining for phosphor-tau revealed evidence of CTE-type pathology.

 This marked the first case of CTE pathology in a young woman who experienced IPV. However, there remains a lack of research investigating the long-term neurological consequences for women who have experienced IPV; research is needed to understand the potential for misdiagnosis, nondiagnosis, or the development of dementia and Alzheimer disease as a result of IPV.

 The latter is especially important since TBI has been identified as a modifiable risk factor for dementia.

 Thus, more research is needed to evaluate IPV as a potential risk factor for dementia.

The neurological effects of IPV extend to the entire family and remain under researched. A recent Brain Injury Australia report of the country’s first research into domestic and family violence (DFV) and ABI found that, out of the 16,000 survivors of family violence attending Victoria hospitals over a decade’s time, 2 in every 5 survivors had sustained brain injury.

 Further, nearly 1 in 3 of the survivors of family violence were children and, of those, 1 in every 4 had sustained a brain injury. Because this was not a study of IPV but instead a study of hospitalizations, it likely represents the tip of the iceberg. Similarly, a study of more than 100 clients of 5 domestic abuse shelters in Arizona found 9 in every 10 individuals reported a head injury with loss of consciousness from family violence in the preceding 12 months.24 Of those, 9 in every 10 reported “too many head injuries to quantify.” Yet only 1 in every 5 ever sought medical attention. Thus, community rates of IPV ABI remain radically under researched.

Currently, most domestic violence shelters and emergency department settings do not assess for TBI, non-fatal strangulation, or other brain injuries from IPV, despite the significant number of studies that demonstrate brain trauma among IPV survivors as well as those that show non-fatal strangulation as an important risk factor for homicide of women.

 Additionally, many women do not seek medical care for their IPV-related ABI.

 However, even when women do interact with social workers, physicians, or domestic violence advocates and shelter staff, there is a lack of training in these professions to adequately screen for and address IPV-related ABI.

Further, when developing criminal justice policy, histories of abuse and brain injury should be addressed. A study of women in prison found that 78% had significant head injury; 84% of these women had experienced repeated head injury largely as a result of domestic abuse that had occurred over many years.

 Yet screening and care for brain injury is not adequately accounted for in criminal justice. The staggering statistics of the number of women who have experienced abuse and are now in prison also further necessitates the development of a trauma-informed criminal justice system.

IPV-related ABI add yet another injustice to the Brain Health Gap, which highlights and frames the sex and gender gap in outcomes for brain health disorders across the lifespan, with strikingly negative outcomes for women.

 To address the Brain Health Gap, research institutions are calling for more women participants in preclinical development of medications, clinical trials, and clinical practice, as well as the expansion of research designed to focus on culturally relevant experiences specific to individuals who identify as female. This will enable more robust and representative data to be collected. Big data, real world evidence, and precision medicine approaches should be the tools used to respond to the call to action above. Furthermore, investing in leaders in health care and public health efforts is imperative to translate these data and perspectives into action. Women remain underrepresented in health care leadership, underlining the lack of gendered consideration in care. These efforts and initiatives are especially important for research, clinical care, and training related to IPV. The Brain Health Gap must address issues related to IPV-related ABIs.

Likewise, we have previously noted that the world is suffering a global brain capital collapse.

Brain Capital is a novel econometric asset that puts a premium on brain health and brain skills in our brain economy.

form of capital relevant to a complex, interconnected, and fragile global economy. Brain Capital needs to be integral to a new narrative of growth and progress that puts people and their well-being, health, interaction with others, and psychological resilience at the center of our economic system. Female empowerment—which includes preventing and addressing violence against women and better identifying and caring for the neurological effects in survivors—is a public and brain health imperative as well as the most effective way to build Brain Capital globally.

Addressing gendered violence and related ABIs can be remedied by integrating the social, medical, political, policy, and diplomatic levels. Taking sex and gender into account—including structural and social determinants—is critical for equality in brain health and precision medicine. The 

Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development 

Unit’s Neuroscience-inspired Policy Initiative

 We aim to find new ways to reconceptualize and revitalize the economy and how it works, laying the groundwork to identify relevant metrics while building a transdisciplinary network of stakeholders. The effort draws on experts from medicine, neuroscience, gender analysis, economic policy, philanthropy, and business. The Initiative will rapidly refine and advance women’s brain health via a series of research projects, seminars, and clear policy analyses and recommendations. In doing so, we hope to address the Brain Health Gap, leading to greater health justice for all people and a new era of innovation and progress. We hope to help build a future where both men and women are equipped with the support, resources, and care they need to thrive and in turn build more a resilient society and world.

 is an Atlantic Fellow for Equity in Brain Health at the Global Brain Health Institute (GBHI) (at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and Trinity College Dublin), a Thiel Fellow at Stanford University and Steering Committee member for NIPI ( OECD, Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute (MMHPI) and the PRODEO Institute).

is an associate professor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and a research scientist at Massachusetts General Hospital. 

is head stakeholder, Engagement Alzheimer's disease at Biogen and Pro Bono CEO and Co-founder of the Women's Brain Project.

is head of the OECD New Approaches to Economic Challenges Unit, Senior Advisor to the OECD Secretary General and co-lead of OECD NIPI.

is advisor to the chief of staff and gender advisor at OECD.

 is a Senior Clinical Advisor for Cohen Veterans Bioscience’s Trauma Research Programs. She serves as Strategic Advisor co-leading CVB’s Suicide Strategy Initiative. 

 is co-lead of OECD NIPI, strategic advisor to the HEKA Fund (Newfund Capital and Fondation FondaMental), steering committee member for the Brain Health Nexus at Cohen Veterans Bioscience, and holds adjuncts roles with IMPACT at Deakin University, GBHI and Baylor College of Medicine.

How the case of Gabrielle Petito galvanized the internet

October 20, 2021. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/20/style/gabby-petito-case-tiktok-social-media.html

Gabby Petito was strangled. Experts say such an assault is a red flag for intimate partner homicides

 October 12, 2021. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/10/12/gabby-petito-strangled-experts-say-its-common-intimate-partner-violence/8426282002/

A Pandemic within a Pandemic - Intimate Partner Violence during Covid-19

When pandemics clash: Gendered violence-related traumatic brain injuries in women since COVID-19.

5. Breiding MJ, Smith SG, Basile KC, et al. 

Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization--national intimate partner and sexual violence survey

6.United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 

Global study on homicide: Gender-related killing of women and girls

. 2018. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/GSH2018/GSH18_Gender-related_killing_of_women_and_girls.pdf

Gender-based violence: We must flatten the curve of this shadow pandemic

. November-December 2020. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.un.org/africarenewal/magazine/november-december-2020/gender-based-violence-we-must-flatten-curve-shadow-pandemic

Concussion in sport: Domestic violence victims show same brain injury trauma as athletes with CTE

Intimate Partner Violence and Traumatic Brain Injury: State of the Science and Next Steps

10.Liu LY, Bush WS, Koyutürk M, Karakurt G. 

Interplay between traumatic brain injury and intimate partner violence: data driven analysis utilizing electronic health records.

12.Monahan, K., A. Purushotham, and A. Biegon, 

Neurological implications of nonfatal strangulation and intimate partner violence

13. Glass N, Laughon K, Campbell J, et al. 

Non-fatal strangulation is an important risk factor for homicide of women

Adult experience of mental health outcomes as a result of intimate partner violence victimisation: a systematic review

. 2014;5:10.3402/ejpt.v5.24794. Published 2014 Sep 12.

Intimate Partner Violence, Traumatic Brain Injury, and Social Work: Moving Forward

Intimate partner violence and traumatic brain injury: a public health issue

17. Stern RA, Daneshvar DH, Baugh CM, et al. 

Clinical presentation of chronic traumatic encephalopathy

18. Baugh CM, Stamm JM, Riley DO, et al. 

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy: neurodegeneration following repetitive concussive and subconcussive brain trauma. 

19. Roberts GW, Whitwell HL, Acland PR, Bruton CJ. 

20. Danielsen T, Hauch C, Kelly L, White CL. 

Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE)-Type Neuropathology in a Young Victim of Domestic Abuse

21. Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, et al. Dementia

 prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission

Evaluating spousal abuse as a potential risk factor for Alzheimer's disease: rationale, needs and challenges

The prevalence of acquired brain injury among victims and perpetrators of family violence

. 2018. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.braininjuryaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/BRAININJURYAUSTRALIAfamilyviolencebraininjuryFINAL.pdf

Traumatic Brain Injury in Domestic Violence Victims: A Retrospective Study at the Barrow Neurological Institute

Head Trauma in a Community-Based Sample of Victims of Intimate Partner Violence: Prevalence, Mechanisms of Injury and Symptom Presentation 

[published online ahead of print, 2021 May 15]. 

. Brain injury in women experiencing intimate partner-violence: neural mechanistic evidence of an "invisible" trauma

27. McMillan TM, Aslam H, Crowe E, et al. 

Associations between significant head injury and persisting disability and violent crime in women in prison in Scotland, UK: a cross-sectional study

28. Aragam GG, Kawaguchi N, Hynes W, et al, Highlighting brain-based inequalities for women: from bedside and boardroom to policy. 

. May 5, 2021. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/brain-based-inequalities-women

29. Smith E, Kawaguchi N, Chapman SB, et al. 

Closing the brain health gap: addressing women’s inequalities

. Oxford University Press Blog. August 21, 2021. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://blog.oup.com/2021/08/closing-the-brain-health-gap-addressing-womens-inequalities/

30. Smith E, Ali D, Wilkerson B, et al. A Brain Capital Grand Strategy: toward economic reimagination. 

31. Eyre HA, Ayadi R, Ellsworth W, et al. 

32.Ellsworth W, Smith E, Champman SB, et al. 

Move over data, brain capital is the new oil

. 2021. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/move-over-data-brain-capital-is-the-new-oil

. January 13, 2021. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.oecd.org/naec/brain-capital/

Articles

In honor of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women on November 25, 2021, let’s consider the impact of IPV on the neuropsychiatric health of women. 

Shedding Light on the Shadow Brain Pandemic: The Devastating Effects of Gendered Violence-Related Acquired Brain Injury

As brain health investing sees unprecedented growth and activity, how do we ensure a sustainable rate of progress going forward? An editorial in 

reported that “In 2019 alone, venture capital (VC) companies invested a record-breaking $637 million in more than 60 different mental health-oriented companies.”

 This has accelerated further in 2020 and 2021.

 The whole VC field is booming, and beyond just mental health care, investment in the broader field of brain health science and technology is also on the rise.

There is a good reason for this: Brain health technologies are essential clinical tools for addressing the global brain health pandemic and its multiple social and technological changes.

 These technologies—spanning omics, digital therapeutics, artificial intelligence, and devices—aim to improve access, screening, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. There is an increasing convergence of these types of solutions as clinicians, health systems, and payors attempt to simplify clinical workflows and minimize fragmentation of new products and services (

With investment in brain health growing so quickly, it is easy to be optimistic about the current and future state of the field. Recent societal trends reinforce the ostensibly rosy picture. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the destigmatization of mental illnesses and highlighted the importance of brain health to the public.

 Similarly, the pandemic has unveiled as never before intrinsic connections between mental and brain health, economy, innovation, and wellbeing.

 It is crucial, though, that we do not take progress for granted and rest on our laurels. It is also critical that we take a responsible approach to this field, which is very vulnerable to hope (due to the dire suffering and intense want for relief) and hype (due to major business opportunities).

Indeed, the stakes are too high. Given the multi-trillion-dollar costs of mental health disorders, the poor standard of routine care, and the projected rises in prevalence and economic burden of mental health disorders in the coming decades, 

 The show must go on! In order to protect and reinforce the vibrant brain health ecosystem, we must anticipate risks of market failure and work to proactively mitigate them. We wrote about this 

; however, this article is a much more extensive thesis and set of recommendations.

) is a graphical depiction of a common pattern that arises with each new technology or other innovation.

 It represents the maturity, adoption, and social application of specific technologies (

). We believe the Hype Cycle is relevant to the frontier brain health technology field and can provide a cautionary tale for the field.

Risks for the Frontier Brain Health Technology Field

We are seeing signs of “Peak of Inflated Expectations” in this field. There are regular news articles touting the rising rates of VC investment, which have helped create a record number of brain health “unicorn” companies (companies valued over $1 billion).

 Concerns have been raised over the emergence of public disclosure of speculative valuations and seemingly inflated valuations (for instance, the digital therapeutics company Pear Therapeutics achieved a valuation of $1.6 billion with less than $4 million in revenue).

 Many commercially successful technologies have major consumer demand, but are not yet integrated into clinical workflows. There is also a common disconnect between commercially successful apps vs those that are validated and more likely to be accepted in clinical practice guidelines. Some have deemed the digital mental health technology field the “lawless wild west,” citing concerns around false claims and poor data privacy management practices.

 Digital phenotyping has failed to make it into clinical workflows.

Further, there are significant safety concerns from post-marketing safety data of a popular new antidepressant, esketamine.

 Such post-marketing data is often not taken into account in the initial go-to-market excitement. Of course, this data is in and of itself a cautionary tale for the psychedelics field, which has received huge investor interest and public interest.

 Psychedelics in psychiatry to date have no post-marketing data, and no study to date is powered to detect conversion to psychosis. Nonhallucinogenic forms of these molecules may be helpful.

 Taken together, these issues create significant concern for this field’s sustainability.

There is thus a risk that the field will slip into the “Trough of Disillusionment.” This will be disappointing, given that every company failure may represent potentially valuable products and services that will not help patients. Moreover, novel intellectual property will be lost. Much of this downward slide will be driven by conventional VC models that are suboptimal for the brain health technology field. Conventional or general VC models rely on financial executives with minimal to no domain experience. The 2/20 model values financial returns within a set timeframe and disincentivizes significant operational input from general partners (GPs).

 Additionally, strategies prevalent in technology startups may not always transfer well to health care startups (eg, “fake it ‘til you make it,” “move fast and break things,” and Theranos). Problems we observe with conventional VC models are outlined in 

How Conventional Venture Capital May Risk Sliding the Field Into the “Trough of Disillusionment”

A Brain Health Technology Market Sustainability Grand Strategy

We suggest a grand strategy that could enable the field to bypass the “Trough of Disillusionment” and progress directly to the “Plateau of Productivity.” VC remains a critical component, but we believe it is imperative to consider additional investment, operational, and governance approaches. We outline these approaches to optimize the field’s sustainability in 

Elements of a Brain Health Technology Market Sustainability Grand Strategy

To optimize the integrity and legitimacy of brain health technology investing, it is key to develop standards and best practices with major international stakeholders. Examples may include the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). Engagement with these groups will support sustained engagement with sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, mutual funds, and other large multinational corporations. Moreover, to ensure a global impact, global stakeholders must face the challenges to assure brain health development in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where multiple structural conditions may block progress and sustainability. For example, the October 2021 WHO Mental Health Atlas outlined a global lack of progress in leadership, governance, and financing.

“None of the targets for effective leadership and governance for mental health, provision of mental health services in community-based settings, mental health promotion and prevention, and strengthening of information systems were close to being achieved.

The new UN Health Innovation Exchange is a step in the right direction aiming to connect funders, investors, and innovations. Other progress has recently been made. We 

 that the Sustainability Accounting Standards board included mental health and wellbeing in its proposed updated human capital standards.

 Also, a new ISO standard 45003 gives guidance on managing psychological health and safety risks within an occupational health and safety management system

; the Business Roundtable noted that the generation of a healthy environment is a key purpose of a corporation

; and the signatories of the Principles of Responsible Investing listed mental health as one of the top 4 social issue priorities in the future.

Further, the OECD’s New Approaches to Economic Challenges unit has established a Neuroscience-inspired Policy Initiative that seeks to reconceptualize and revitalize the economy and how it works in new ways, laying the groundwork to identify relevant metrics while building a transdisciplinary network of stakeholders. The initiative will rapidly refine and advance the concept of Brain Capital (a novel asset class grossing up brain health and brain skills) via a series of research projects, surveys, data collection, economic modeling, seminars, and clear policy analyses and recommendations.

Tracking Brain Health Technology Market Sustainability

Tracking metrics on this topic would be useful, given the risks outlined in this article. Metrics of company and market sustainability could offer investors greater ability to make scientifically and data-grounded investments and to ensure the field develops sustainably. However, developing representative metrics of company and market sustainability is challenging in a market where most investments flow into private companies. This precludes the use of typical financial metrics such as free cash flow and yearly revenue. While private companies will disclose data, it is likely that they will only release information that is self-serving and can generate interest from investors and the general public. Further, given the strength of the financial incentives of both limited partners and fund managers, it will be challenging to achieve a more sustainable approach. Financial incentives prioritize force feeding unicorns to maximize exit price and maximizing the share price of public companies. Most likely, metrics will need to be carefully developed by integrating data and judgment in a transparent way, possibly through the tools of multi-criteria decision analysis.

Tracking market sustainability is further challenged by the 

 inherent in a field largely reliant on highly technical advances.

 This enables companies to craft a reductionist and self-serving story of how their products function, a phenomenon exemplified by Theranos. Moreover, many life science companies themselves do not fully understand how their products work, which complicates efforts to overcome the information asymmetry rife in the brain health technology field.

Nonetheless, we believe there are available metrics that could help form an index of company and broader brain health market sustainability. These measures represent outputs that can help investors mitigate the risk of company and broader market failures. 

 outlines such elements that may be included in a proposed brain health market sustainability index.

Potential Components of a Brain Health Market Sustainability Index

 recently published a project mapping 50 emerging digital health technologies onto the Hype Cycle.

 We suggest that this type of project should be completed specifically in the brain health technology field, and it should involve surveys of diverse stakeholders from many countries. Then tracking where individuals believe brain health technology map onto the Hype Cycle in a yearly manner would be prudent to guide the field.

In the brain health technology field, there is considerable variability concerning where particular technologies and technology classes sit in the Hype Cycle. Therefore, further work is required to map specific examples onto the cycle. However, irrespective of where these examples stand, formalizing and employing the abovementioned sustainability strategy in the United States, where most investment is currently directed, could mitigate the risk of a broader brain health market failure.

 Of course, we believe our approach should also be deployed proactively outside the United States, especially as global investment begins to increase. We hope that it may even be possible to largely avoid the “Trough of Disillusionment” and reach the “Plateau of Productivity.” We believe our approach could sustain the brain health technology market for decades. Humanity deserves and needs it!

 is an undergraduate studying neuroscience at Dartmouth College. 

 is a director at the PRODEO Institute, an Atlantic Fellow in Brain Health Equity at the Global Brain Health Institute at the University of California, San Francisco, and a Thiel Fellow at Stanford University. 

 is cofounder of the PRODEO Institute and CEO of PRODEO. 

 is Alfred Deakin Professor of Psychiatry at Deakin University and director of IMPACT at Deakin University (Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation). 

 is the director of the Latin American Brain Health Institute, a senior researcher at the Universidad de San Andrés, and a Senior Atlantic Fellow at the GBHI at the UCSF and Trinity College Dublin. 

 is a venture capitalist and an adjunct faculty member at UC Berkeley and Singularity University. 

is a venture capitalist and an adjunct professor in engineering at Stanford University. 

 is a senior clinical advisor for Cohen Veterans Bioscience’s Trauma Research Programs who also serves as strategic advisor co-leading CVB’s Suicide Strategy Initiative. 

 is a corporate attorney, a professor of law at University of Surrey, and an adjunct professor with the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine. 

 is venture capitalist, founder and managing partner at Newfund Capital. 

 is an undergraduate studying computer science at Stanford University. 

 is the CEO of Fondation FondaMental and professor of psychiatry at University Paris Est Créteil. 

 is a neurologist, neuroscientist, and technologist. He is an adjunct professor with the Department of Neurology at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and co-lead of The BrainHealth Project at the Center for BrainHealth at The University of Texas at Dallas. 

 is senior scientific and technical manager at the US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, where he manages crisis response and resilience project portfolio. 

 is the CEO and president of Cohen Veterans Bioscience. 

 is cofounder of the PRODEO Institute and co-lead of the OECD NIPI, and he holds adjunct roles with IMPACT at Deakin University, GBHI at UCSF, Brain Health Nexus at Cohen Veterans Bioscience, and Baylor College of Medicine. He is a probono strategic advisor to the HEKA Fund (a collaboration of Newfund Capital and FondaMental Fondation).

The Rise of Venture Capital Investing in Mental Health

. July 29, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

. August 23, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

The best neuroscience news stories from January 2021

Boosting brain health after COVID-19: a convergence solution

. May 14, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

Could COVID-19 finally destigmatize mental illness?

. May 13, 2020. Accessed October 12, 2021.

8. Eyre HA, Ayadi R, Ellsworth W, et al. 

A brain capital grand strategy: toward economic reimagination

Responsible innovation in technology for mental health care

Lancet Commission: inaction on mental health crisis will cost world $16 trillion by 2030

. March 25, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

Gartner: 3 themes to watch in emerging technologies

. August 24, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

Soaring mental health unicorns race to meet employer needs

. February 16, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

How private markets embraced valuation disclosure

. April 30, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

Pear Therapeutics plans to go public in $1.6B SPAC deal

. June 22, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

The growing field of digital psychiatry: current evidence and the future of apps, social media, chatbots, and virtual reality

Smartphones could be used to detect depression, Verily finds

. October 3, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

21. Gastaldon C, Raschi E, Kane JM, et al. 

Post-marketing safety concerns with esketamine: a disproportionality analysis of spontaneous reports submitted to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System

22. Vargas MV, Meyer R, Avanes AA, et al. 

Psychedelics and other psychoplastogens for treating mental illness

. October 4, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

Investors are tripping on psychedelics startups despite a murky path to commercial success

. August 16, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

. March 3, 2021. Accessed October 12, 2021.

New approaches to ensure that the brain health technology sector continues to flourish for decades.

Harris Eyre, MD, PhD

Articles

Shedding Light on the Shadow Brain Pandemic: The Devastating Effects of Gendered Violence-Related Acquired Brain Injury

Avoiding a Brain Health Innovation Market Failure: Lessons from the Hype Cycle

Brain Science Must Be on COP 26 Agenda

Sustaining Investment in Brain Health: The Dangers of Information Asymmetry

Let’s Build Brains Better! Brain Science-Inspired Policies for the Future

Anthropology-Informed Business Principles for Brain Health