Correction

Psychiatric and neurological diseases combined represent a considerable social and economic burden in Europe. A recent study conducted by the European Brain Council (EBC) quantified the 'cost and burden' of major brain diseases in Europe, amounting to €386bn per year. Considering that these costs will increase exponentially in the years to come due to ageing of the European population, it is necessary to act now in order to curb this increase and possibly reverse the trend. Thus, establishing a strong European platform supporting basic and clinical research in neuroscience is needed to confront the economic and social challenge posed by management of brain diseases in European countries. To setup a platform for discussion, EBC published in 2006 a Consensus Document on European Brain Research, describing needs and achievements of research in Europe and presenting proposals for future research programs. Since 2006, European research in neuroscience has advanced tremendously. The present document represents an update elaborated to reflect changes in research priorities and advances in brain research that have taken place since 2006. The same approach and format have been used here as in the previous version. Multinational and multidisciplinary teams have once again come together to express their views, not only on the current strengths in European research, but also on what needs to be done in priority, hoping that this update will inspire policy makers and stakeholders in directing funding for research in Europe.

This article is a markedly condensed summary of a longer report [Resource allocation to brain research in Europe (RABRE), part 2] that is simultaneously published on line: (i) as supplementary material linked to this European Journal of Neuroscience article (http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/ejn) and (ii) on the website of the European Brain Council (http://www.europeanbraincouncil.org/publications). We have recently shown that brain diseases account for 35% of the overall disease burden and cost European society almost euro 400 billion per year (a billion is understood to mean one thousand million throughout this report). The aim of the present study was to estimate funding for brain research in Europe and the cost-benefit of further investments in this area of research. The assessment of funding included public sources (governmental agencies plus charities) and industry funding. The assessment of publicly financed research support for brain research was based on a comprehensive survey, and industry investment in brain research was assessed based on published data on pharmaceutical development. The total funding of brain research in Europe was estimated at euro 4.1 billion in 2005, of which public grants amounted to < euro 900 million. Thus, industry funding accounted for 79%. Although cancer only incurred 50% of the cost of brain diseases in 2005, public grants for cancer research were almost twice as high as the public financial support of brain research. US-based funding of brain research was almost four times higher than European funding. We assessed the cost-benefit of further investment in brain research using different methods. They all showed that increased investment in brain research is likely to be highly cost-effective. We conclude that European spending on brain research, particularly public spending, is low compared to other fields of research and to the US, and that increased investment in brain research seems warranted.

Learning motivated by electrical stimulation of the brain.

PROJECTION OF THE RETINA ON SUPERIOR COLLICULUS OF CATS

The International Journal of Integrated Care (IJIC) is an online, open-access, peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles in the field of integrated care on a continuous basis.IJIC has an Impact Factor of 5.120 (2020 JCR, received in June 2021)

Fundamental research in the European Community on the chemical and physical properties of coal: The European commission's research programme: ‘Chemical and Physical Valorisation of Coal’

&lt;it&gt;David Linden read medicine, classics and philosophy in Germany. He obtained a DPhil from the University of Oxford for his work on medical ethics in antiquity in 2000 and a Dr. med. in neuroscience at the Max Planck Institute for Brain Research in 1999. He trained in psychiatry at Frankfurt University and has a special interest in clinical neuropsychiatry and neurodevelopmental genetic syndromes. Since 2011 he has been Professor of Translational Neuroscience at Cardiff University and Head of the Neuroimaging theme group of the MRC Centre for Neuropsychiatric Genetics and Genomics. He is also the director for clinical research at the Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre. In his research, he applies structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), neurophysiological techniques and genetics in order to understand the function of the brain in health and disease. Current research interests include functional imaging of psychopathology, neural substrates of social cognition and decision making, genetic imaging, treatment and training effects on the brain, and neurofeedback. David is the author of “The Biology of Psychological Disorders” (2012), “Brain Control” (2014) and “Neuroimaging and Neurophysiology in Psychiatry” (2016) and over 180 scientific papers in the fields of biological psychiatry, functional brain imaging, visual and social cognitive neuroscience, and neurofeedback. He has coordinated trials of functional MRI-based neurofeedback in depression and Parkinson’s disease. He is also the coordinator of the European Consortium “BRAINTRAIN” (www.braintrainproject.eu), funded by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme, which develops and evaluates imaging-based neurofeedback methods for a range of mental disorders. He is a consultant psychiatrist with the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and provides clinics at the Welsh Neuropsychiatric Service, the Cardiff University Psychiatric Service (specialising in neurodevelopmental genetic syndromes) and the Welsh Huntington’s Disease Service. He has been a member of the board of directors of the BNPA since 2014.&lt;/it&gt; The techniques of brain imaging and neurophysiology (both invasive and non-invasive) hold considerable promise for the understanding of human mental processes. One branch of neurophysiology and cognitive neuroscience research is concerned with the inference of particular mental states from neural activation patterns. One of the aims of this research is to identify intentions in patients with severe communication disorders (for example the “locked-in” state). Another proposed application is in the distinction between disorders of consciousness and disorders of communication. Recent advances in the analysis of functional brain images that allow for the classification of mental states also raise the question whether these techniques can be used to underpin psychiatric diagnoses, possibly even support or refute patients’ claim about their own mental states. This talk discusses the clinical promise and also the technical and ethical limitations of these approaches and puts them in the context of the history and future of neuropsychiatry. &lt;sec&gt;&lt;st&gt;References&lt;/st&gt; &lt;l type="ord"&gt;&lt;li&gt; . David Linden. Brain Control – Developments in Therapy and Implications for Society. Palgrave Macmillan 2014. &lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt; . Sarah Richmond, Geraint Rees, Sarah JL, Edwards (eds). I know what you’re thinking – Brain imaging and mental privacy. Oxford University Press 2012. &lt;/li&gt;&lt;/l&gt; &lt;/sec&gt;

Mapping the mind—smart thinking for brain health?

This essay traces the simultaneous development of two distinct efforts to unify the brain sciences in the twentieth century—one originating at the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) and the other at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Both efforts coalesced around investigations of memory but displayed profoundly different disciplinary styles. At the MNI, investigations of memory loss in surgical patients crystallized a form of brain research that eventually became the paradigm of interdisciplinarity for the International Brain Research Organization (IBRO). At MIT, meanwhile, the biophysicist Francis Schmitt aimed to transcend the different brain and mind sciences by discovering a “memory molecule” akin to DNA—this became the basis for his Neurosciences Research Program (NRP). While both organizations failed to achieve the unification they desired, IBRO and the NRP did achieve a social unification of the brain sciences in the 1960s. IBRO established much of the social capital for the Society for Neuroscience, and the NRP promoted the possibilities of a new transdisciplinary “neuroscience.” Beyond reframing the history of modern neuroscience, the story of the MNI/IBRO, the NRP, and the problem of memory can help us to examine different and contrasting approaches to “interdisciplinarity” in twentieth-century science.

The Brain and Mind Research Institute (BMRI), affiliated with the Mongolian Academy of Sciences (MAS), in collaboration with the International Brain Research Organization (IBRO) and the Mongolian Neuroscience Society (MNS), organized the Brain Science Week 2022 from August 8 to 13, 2022, in Ulaanbaatar. The Brain Science Week 2022 included three main events: a 6-day training school for neuroscientists, the IBRO-APRC Ulaanbaatar Associate School on Brain-Related Disorders, a roundtable meeting with stakeholders and advisors themed "Perspectives of Brain Science in Mongolia", and the 9th Annual Meeting of MNS, Multidisciplinary Brain Science 2022. In addition, a press conference and an art contest, Brain Have No Limit, were organized to raise brain awareness in public. The IBRO-APRC Ulaanbaatar Associate School on Brain-Related Disorders was aimed to train 20 students on current advances in brain science by seven international faculties and 14 local faculties in six consecutive days. As a satellite event to the school, a 2-day training program for school psychologists, Basic Concepts of Psychology, was held in conjunction with the Mongolian Psychologists Association. The 9th Annual Meeting of MNS brought together 31 speakers and more than 100 participants who attended 14 invited lectures by world-leading neuroscientists in Ulaanbaatar. The support of MAS, the Mongolian National University of Medical Sciences, and the Ministry of Education and Science of Mongolia also contributed to the success of the events. The events made clear what we have achieved so far and what we have to do next for the development of brain science in Mongolia for all participants and the general population.

After 50 years of wandering among new discovery technologies and a worrying antiquated development process, the research and development (R&D) enterprise may finally have found a way out of its wilderness through the auspices of translational medicine. For that to happen, a number of problems have to be confronted. Most prominent is the traditional problem credited with giving rise to translational medicine - the lack of a feedback loop from bench to bedside. However, there are equally significant roadblocks to be confronted at every turn along the R&D pathway, from basic research through discovery and preclinical testing and, finally, into the clinic. Translational medicine is now beginning to encompass other powerful and promising innovations such as personalized medicine, bioinformatics, advanced imaging and biomarkers to help move beyond these roadblocks. Although translational medicine has attracted significant financial support in recent years, the economics of the movement are still challenging, as public and private sector funding are both difficult to come by due to the economic downturn. Some of the dearth of monies has been redressed by foundations and public-private partnerships, which combine resources and, hence, divide the risk to the benefit of all. More recently, the inherent tension among the traditional roles of 'big pharma', biotechs and the public sector, which had waned somewhat in the wake of the Bayh-Dole legislation in the USA, has re-emerged owing to the furor over conflicts of interest. Translational medicine may help alleviate these tensions by its example of successful precompetitive collaboration, such as the Predictive Safety Testing Consortium and its effective use of project management techniques in multidisciplinary, multiphasic, multisectoral projects to bring the discipline necessary for the efficient functioning of consortia. Changing a research paradigm that has remained substantially unchanged for half a century will require considerable time, money and effort. However, there is reason to be optimistic that translational medicine is the right solution for the right problem at the right time.

This month, Jean-Pierre Bourguignon began his tenure as president of the European Research Council (ERC). This is a daunting task for many reasons: The growing ERC budget requires that it be carefully positioned within a complex array of European funding opportunities; embedding the presidential role into the ERC executive agency in the European Commission's Directorate-General for Research and Innovation potentially reduces ERC's independence; and variable success rates for acquiring ERC funding are concerning, and research expectations will need to be managed.

Emotional Reactivity in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder:Behavioural and Neurobiological Correlates of Underlying Mechanisms and the Role of Emotional Memory Modification

BLJ thanks support from the European Space Agency (ESA) and SC acknowledges nancial support from the Science & Technology Facilities Council (STFC). The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013)/ERC Grant Agreement no. 308024.

Science and Techonology Facilities Council; European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013), ERC Grant Agreement No. STG 279943, “Strongly Coupled Systems”