Structural Gaps in Colombian Neuroscience

Neuroethical Implications in the AI Era

Pablo Reyes, PhD

Colegio Colombiano de Neurociencias (COLNE) Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

2026-01-01

Overview

  1. Colombian Achievements: World-class contributions and current capacity

  2. Structural Gaps: Funding, training, and infrastructure deficits

  3. Clinical Consequences: Health inequalities and diagnostic gaps

  4. AI Amplification: How technology magnifies existing inequities

  5. Neuroethical Analysis: Justice and epistemic violations

  6. Path Forward: Evidence-based recommendations

Important

Core argument: AI amplifies pre-existing structural gaps

Colombian Neuroscience: Research Output

The Numbers (Scopus 1996-2026)

  • 3,468 total publications
  • ~350-400 publications/year (recent)
  • Steady 8x growth since 1996
  • 85% clinical, <15% basic

Citation Impact

  • 87,312 total citations
  • 11.8% in top 10% most cited globally
  • 16.6% in top 10% journals (CiteScore)
  • Gap in basic science output

Collaboration Patterns (2020-2024)

  • 69.4% international collaboration
  • 2.8% academic-corporate collaboration
  • 125,052 Scopus views

Research Focus (Global Share)

  • Neurology (0.6%)
  • General Neuroscience (0.4%)
  • Cellular & Molecular (0.2%)
  • Cognitive Neuroscience (0.2%)
  • <5% basic neuroscience

Warning

High international collaboration but minimal corporate partnerships (OECD: 15-25%)

Colombian Neuroscience: World-Class Achievements

PSEN1 Alzheimer’s Cohort

Largest in the world

Neuroscience Group of Antioquia (GNA)

Global Impact:

  • Reframed AD as 20+ year preclinical continuum
  • Enables prevention trials
  • 100+ international publications
  • Top-tier journal recognition

Quiroz et al., 2020

LAC-CD Consortium

Regional leadership

Colombian co-leadership

Innovations:

  • Low-cost EEG biomarkers
  • Automated speech analysis
  • Cross-dialect validation
  • Standardized protocols

IF: 11.1 (Q1)

Parra et al., Alz & Dementia

These achievements demonstrate Colombian capacity for world-leading science

Colombian Neuroscience: Regional Leadership

Brain Banking Initiative

Hispano-American Brain Bank

Colombian participation in regional network

IF: 6.2 (Q1) Brain Pathology

Building post-mortem research capacity

Diverse Populations

Cali Dementia Study

Key finding: >70% FTD misdiagnosed

Zapata-Restrepo et al., 2023

IF: 11.1 (Q1)

Tropical Neuroinfections

NEAS Dengue Study

Documented ICU-level severity

Unique regional contribution

Neurology, 2020

Epidemiological Studies

ALS Population Study

First incidence data

Socioeconomic determinants

IF: 2.8 (Q2)

Important

The Challenge: Scale these successes & build infrastructure to sustain leadership

Colombian Neuroscience: Unique Strengths in Social Impact

Social Determinants Focus

N=23,694 aging study (SABE Colombia)

  • Theory-driven + machine learning approaches
  • Social determinants stronger predictors than medical factors
  • Community-dwelling populations
  • Underserved populations priority

Published in leading journals

Migration & Brain Health

Pioneering research on displaced populations

  • Mental health impacts on migrants
  • Structural determinants approach
  • Women, children as key populations
  • Policy-oriented findings

Neuroscience special issue 2025

Resilience in Adversity

Research in extreme contexts:

  • Armed conflict survivors
  • Forced displacement (7+ million)
  • Violence & trauma exposure
  • Adaptation under resource scarcity

Unique expertise in brain health under adversity

Community-Centered Science

  • Culturally relevant assessment tools
  • Traditional healer collaboration
  • Brain Awareness Week (decade-long)
  • Public engagement emphasis
  • Science for society, not just publications

Colombian neuroscience excels at understanding how social context shapes brain health

Research Impact: The Paradox

Publication Growth (Scopus)

  • 1996: ~50 publications/year
  • 2024: ~400 publications/year
  • 8x growth in 28 years

Citation Performance

  • 11.8% in top 10% most cited
  • Comparable to regional peers
  • But in low-volume specialties
  • Average citations/paper still below global mean

The Collaboration Paradox

  • 69.4% international collaboration
  • Among highest rates globally
  • BUT: 2.8% corporate collaboration
  • OECD average: 15-25%

Dependencies

High dependency on foreign partners

Limited private sector engagement

Lack of translational capacity

Junior authorship positions (73%)

Quality present, but scale and independence lacking

The Geographic Concentration Problem

Extreme Centralization

  • 78% in 5 institutions
  • 92% in 8 of 32 departments
  • Bogotá-Medellín-Cali triangle

International Collaborations

  • 69.4% publications with international co-authors
  • 73% Colombians in middle/final authorship
  • Roles: Data collection, patient recruitment
  • Not: Conceptual/methodological leadership
  • 2.8% academic-corporate (vs 15-25% OECD)

Neuroscience Deserts

80% of Colombian territory has minimal to no neuroscience research capacity

Departments like:

  • Chocó
  • Guainía
  • Vaupés
  • Amazonas

Virtually ZERO research presence

Quality vs. Scale

  • 11.8% in top 10% cited
  • But 0.4-0.6% global share
  • Limited absolute output

The Funding Crisis: OECD Context

Colombia’s Position in OECD Rankings

  • R&D: 0.29% of GDP (among lowest 25%)
  • Researchers: 256 per million (OECD average: 4,521)
Country R&D % GDP Researchers/Million
Colombia 0.29 256
Chile 0.52 896
Brazil 1.16 1,023
Argentina 0.49 1,245
OECD average 2.71 4,521

Important

Colombia has 17.6x fewer researchers per capita than OECD average

Grant Sizes: The Reality

Typical Colombian Grants

  • MinCiencias: $20,000-$1,000,000 USD
  • University funds: $5,000-$15,000 USD
  • Duration: 2-3 years

Regional Comparison

  • Chile: $50,000-$150,000
  • Brazil: $40,000-$200,000
  • Argentina: $30,000-$120,000
  • USA/Europe: $200,000-$500,000+

The Problem

Basic neuroscience research needs 4-7 years

Current funding cycles are too short and too small for fundamental research

Training Crisis: Doctoral Bottleneck

Current Capacity

Only 4 PhD programs:

  1. UN Bogotá
  2. U. Antioquia
  3. U. Javeriana
  4. U. Costa

Capacity: 40-50/year

Need: 150+/year

OECD Context

Colombia: 3%

OECD: 16%

5.3x below average

The Training Paradox

Warning

Students Learn Theory BUT Cannot Practice:

  • Optogenetics
  • CRISPR gene editing
  • Calcium imaging
  • Two-photon microscopy
  • Single-cell RNA-seq
  • Brain organoids
  • Advanced electrophysiology
  • Viral vector production

Theory: ✓ | Practice: ✗

“Theoretically trained but practically inexperienced”

Brain Drain: The Numbers

Forced Migration

  • 65% train abroad
  • 30-35% don’t return
  • Economic loss: $250K-400K per person

OECD Data

  • ~25% internationally mobile
  • Higher in STEM: ~30%
  • OECD average: ~20%

Areas of Greatest Loss

  • Computational neuroscience
  • Systems neuroscience
  • Molecular neurobiology
  • Advanced imaging
  • Optogenetics
  • Neurogenetics

Warning

Precisely the areas where Colombia has greatest deficits

Infrastructure: OECD

Indicator Colombia Chile Argentina Brazil OECD
MRI/million 6.2 15.3 12.8 9.4 51.7
R&D (% GDP) 0.29 0.52 0.49 1.16 2.71
Researchers/M 256 896 1,245 1,023 4,521

Research Neuroimaging (Entire Country)

  • <10 fMRI scanners for research
  • 0 MEG systems
  • ~15 HD-EEG systems
  • 3 research PET scanners

Warning

Colombia in bottom 25% for: GERD, HERD, GBARD as % GDP

The Microscopy Crisis

Confocal Microscopy

  • 12-15 systems nationally
  • Bogotá: 7 | Medellín: 4 | Cali: 3
  • 50,000 confocal microscopes worldwide
  • Colombia: 0.03% of global capacity
  • Mostly 5-15 years old, shared, poor maintenance

Advanced Microscopy

ZERO Two-photon systems

ZERO Super-resolution (STED, STORM, PALM)

ZERO Modern electron microscopy

ZERO Light-sheet microscopy

Why Microscopy Matters

The Fundamental Problem

Colombian neuroscientists cannot see what they study at required resolution

Cannot:

  • Visualize synapses
  • See organelles
  • Observe nanoscale
  • Image activity in vivo

Result:

Descriptive phenomenology

vs.

Mechanistic investigation

Can ask what

Cannot ask how/why

Electrophysiology: Patch-Clamp & In Vivo Recording

Patch-Clamp

  • 5-6 rigs total
  • 4 institutions
  • ~10,000 rigs worldwide
  • Colombia: 0.06%

Cannot Study:

  • Ion channel properties
  • Synaptic transmission
  • Neuronal excitability
  • Detailed pharmacology

In Vivo Recording

  • 3-4 groups
  • Basic single/few-channel systems

Absent:

  • Silicon probe recording (Neuropixels)
  • Wireless systems
  • High-channel arrays (256-4096 channels)
  • Behavior + neural recording at scale

Major US/EU Department: 6-10 patch-clamp rigs, 4-8 in vivo setups

Brain Organoids: Complete Absence

ZERO

Brain organoid programs in Colombia

Why This Matters:

  • One of the most dynamic areas of contemporary neuroscience
  • Model human neurodevelopment
  • Study autism, schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s mechanisms
  • Human-specific features
  • Drug screening on human tissue

Warning

Colombian researchers can read about international findings but cannot contribute discoveries

Optogenetics: Complete Absence

ZERO

Established optogenetics programs

(1-2 groups attempting to establish capability)

What Colombia Misses:

  • The primary tool of 21st-century systems neuroscience
  • Control neurons with light (millisecond precision)
  • Establish causal circuit-behavior links
  • Cell-type specific manipulation
  • Thousands of labs worldwide | Tens of thousands of papers

Warning

Cannot test hypotheses, validate findings, or contribute discoveries in modern systems neuroscience

Infrastructure Summary: The Chasm

Element Major US/EU Dept Colombia (All)
Confocal microscopes 4-6 12-15
Two-photon microscopes 2-3 0
Patch-clamp rigs 6-10 5-6
Optogenetics programs 8-15 0-1
Organoid programs 3-8 0
Transgenic mouse lines 100-300+ 5-10
Computing (petaflops) 1,000s 0.1-0.2

OECD Context:

  • Higher Education researchers: Colombia bottom 25%
  • Share of top-cited publications: Bottom quartile

Important

This is not a gap—it is a CHASM

The Causal Chain: Infrastructure → Clinical Outcomes

How do these infrastructure gaps translate into human consequences?

Infrastructure Deficits

  • No advanced microscopy
  • No optogenetics
  • No organoids
  • Limited neuroimaging
  • 256 researchers/million
  • 2.8% corporate collaboration

Clinical Consequences

  • Cannot develop new biomarkers
  • Rely on foreign algorithms
  • Delayed/missed diagnoses
  • Treatment gaps persist

Result: Geographic lottery determines health outcomes

The Geographic Lottery

Bogotá

  • Multiple specialists
  • Advanced diagnostics
  • Surgery available
  • Clinical trials
  • Support services

Rural Chocó/Amazonas

  • Zero neurologists
  • No imaging
  • No surgery
  • No trials
  • No support

Same disease, opposite outcomes

OECD Context:

  • Gini coefficient: Colombia 0.54 vs. OECD 0.32
  • Highest inequality among OECD countries

AI as Amplifier: The Data Bias Problem

Systematic Review: 142 AI studies in neuroimaging (2018-2023)

  • 87% used exclusively North America/Europe data
  • 0% specifically Colombian populations

Genomic Database Underrepresentation

  • Most genetic discovery relies on European-ancestry datasets
  • Latino genetic diversity not captured
  • Colombian admixture (Indigenous, African, European) not represented

Current State

Barely dementia AI algorithms trained on Colombian data

Barely stroke detection AI validated for Colombian populations

Barely epilepsy prediction AI using Colombian data

Why Colombian Data Matters for AI

Biological Factors

  • High genetic diversity
  • Unique admixture
  • High altitude
  • Tropical diseases
  • Mining/heavy metals
  • Violence/trauma

Technical Factors

  • Older scanners (1.5T)
  • Different vendors
  • Adapted protocols
  • Educational gaps
  • Socioeconomic factors

Risk

AI may misclassify normal as pathological | Different sensitivity/specificity

Paradox: LAC-CD, ReDLat collecting data but barely in AI training

The Validation Gap

Survey of 23 AI tools in Colombian institutions

2 tools (8.7%)

Validated with Colombian data

15 tools (65%)

Implemented without validation

6 tools (26%)

Limited monitoring

Critical Findings

ZERO tools had systematic bias auditing

Concrete Risks:

  • False negatives → Delayed diagnosis, progression
  • False positives → Unnecessary procedures, anxiety
  • Unequal performance: 92% (urban educated) vs. 68% (rural)

Algorithmic Injustice

The Danger

AI systems presented as:

  • Objective
  • Scientific
  • Neutral
  • Bias-free

But without proper validation:

  • Encode existing biases
  • Automate inequalities
  • Legitimize discrimination with technological authority

Data Sovereignty and Benefit Sharing

1. Where are Colombian brain data stored?

When MRI analyzed by foreign AI → Foreign servers

2. Who benefits?

Patients contribute data (often without AI consent)

Benefits flow to: Foreign corporations & institutions

3. Endogenous development capacity?

Colombia lacks capacity to develop proprietary AI

2.8% academic-corporate collaboration (vs 15-25% OECD)

National AI Policy (2025-2031): Adoption, not development

Result: Long-term dependence

Colombia’s Unique Competitive Advantages

Scientific Strengths

11.8% publications in top 10% most cited

World-leading cohorts: - PSEN1 (largest globally) - LAC-CD co-leadership - ReDLat founding partner

Innovation in adversity: - Affordable biomarkers (EEG, speech) - Social determinants expertise - Resilience research

Human Capital

Diaspora advantage: - 30-35% abroad (reversible) - International networks - Dual perspectives - Return incentives working

Strategic Position

Regional hub potential: - Geographic center of LAC - Spanish + English fluency - Biodiversity contexts - Population diversity

Global relevance: - Migration expertise - Conflict/trauma models - Health equity research - Community-centered approaches

Active Momentum

Growing collaborations: - GBHI partnerships - NIH funding - Regional networks - 2.8% → 15% corporate target achievable

The Path Forward: Realistic & Achievable

Already Working:

✓ ReDLat: $20M+ over 5 years

✓ BrainLat: Regional support

✓ Fogarty D43: Training program

✓ LAC-CD: Network established

✓ PSEN1: Global recognition

✓ COLNE: National organization

Next Steps (Years 1-3):

→ Scale successful models 5-10x

→ Leverage existing networks

→ Build on proven expertise

→ Increase from 0.29% to 0.5% GDP R&D

→ Double PhD capacity (feasible)

→ Corporate partnerships: 2.8% → 15%

The Investment Case

$50M/year = 0.5% health GDP

This is NOT starting from zero—it’s scaling proven success

ROI: Regional leadership, knowledge sovereignty, reduced brain drain, clinical equity

Colombia has the foundation. Now needs the scale.

Colombia’s Promise: A Regional Model

What Makes Colombia Unique:

  1. Proven scientific excellence (PSEN1, LAC-CD)

  2. Social impact expertise (SDH research, resilience)

  3. Regional leadership (ReDLat co-founder)

  4. Implementation science focus (not just publications)

  5. Diversity as strength (genetic, environmental, social)

  6. Community engagement (10+ years Brain Awareness)

Colombia Can Become:

→ Regional neuroscience hub for LAC

→ Model for equity-focused research globally

→ Leader in social neuroscience and brain health under adversity

→ Bridge between HIC and LMIC approaches

→ Incubator for affordable biomarkers and accessible diagnostics

→ Training center for Latin American neuroscientists

From surviving with limited resources

To thriving as a regional powerhouse

Key Takeaways: The Complete Picture

  1. Colombia has world-class capacity: PSEN1 cohort (largest globally), LAC-CD co-leadership, ReDLat founding partner, 11.8% in top 10% cited—plus unique expertise in social determinants and resilience

  2. Active momentum with major initiatives: ReDLat ($20M+, 5 years), BrainLat partnership, Fogarty D43, LAC-CD network—infrastructure already growing

  3. Distinctive competitive advantages: Regional hub potential, expertise in adversity contexts, affordable biomarker innovation, implementation science focus, community-centered approaches

  4. But scale limited by structural gaps: Bottom 25% OECD in R&D (0.29% GDP), 256 researchers/million, 2.8% corporate collaboration—need to scale 5-10x

  5. Clinical consequences measurable: 70%+ FTD misdiagnosis, 62% epilepsy treatment gap—but proven interventions exist

  6. AI risk without foundation: 87% AI trained on non-Colombian data, ZERO validated algorithms—but can be addressed with infrastructure investment

  7. Path forward is realistic: Build on proven successes, leverage existing networks, $50M/year (0.5% health GDP), Years 1-3 critical for scaling

Colombia is not starting from zero—it’s scaling proven excellence

Thank You

Questions & Discussion

Pablo Reyes, PhD
Colegio Colombiano de Neurociencias (COLNE)
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

reyes.p@javeriana.edu.co

webpage

www.pabloreyesg.carrd.co

Data sources: Scopus (2020-2024), OECD STIP Compass, OECD STI Scoreboard 2025
Full manuscript and references available upon request

Structural Gaps in Colombian Neuroscience