OPERATOR TO SUPPLY BEFORE PRODUCTION (Sterling confirmed on 2026-10-23 that the Frontiers paper below is our study's write-up, so its figures stand): (1) The study's enrolment window and the date the last participant finished, if you want them stated (the paper gives publication dates only). (2) Approve the "What the paper reports" summary of the primary outcomes, or replace it with your own wording. (3) Where any further write-up or the raw data will be published, if anywhere beyond the paper. Remove this block once each item is settled.
The Ultrasound Memory Study has concluded. It was the at-home study we ran with the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), approved by the IONS Institutional Review Board, and built around the US PRO 2000 handheld ultrasound unit. Its write-up has now been published as a peer-reviewed paper, "Home-administered unfocused transcranial ultrasound in subjective cognitive decline and dementia: an open-label, uncontrolled feasibility pilot study", in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience on 28 September 2026.
First, thank you. Everyone who took part did so from home, on their own schedule, with a doctor's letter in hand before they began, and kept up the device sessions, the daily check-ins and the monthly surveys for weeks at a time. Some participants used the device themselves; others were helped by a caregiver, who took on that work too. A study like this exists only because people are willing to do that.
What the study was
When we described the study to prospective participants in Inside the Ultrasound Memory Study, we were careful to call it a question, not a finding. The published protocol was three daily sessions with the US PRO 2000 for three weeks, then one week off, with a survey before starting, monthly surveys after that, and a short daily log of usage and symptoms.
The paper describes the design in the same plain terms: an exploratory, open-label pilot in which every participant followed the same protocol. There was no sham device, no randomisation and no blinding, and the authors say the study was not prospectively registered in a public trial registry. The study page at IONS lists Dr. Helané Wahbeh as the lead investigator, with Dr. Stuart Hameroff and Sterling Cooley of UltraDAO as collaborators.
What the paper reports
These are the authors' figures, summarised. The paper itself is the authority, and we would encourage anyone with a stake in the question to read it in full.
- Who took part. 27 people enrolled and 26 began treatment; 23 completed at least one monthly follow-up.
- Safety. The authors report no serious or unanticipated adverse events. The events they judged possibly related were headache (15.4% of participants) and jaw clenching (3.8%).
- Cognition. The objective cognitive test battery did not change, and caregiver ratings stayed stable.
- Self-reported symptoms. Among participants who used the device themselves, a short self-report depression scale declined, and most self-reported symptoms improved. Caregiver-rated outcomes did not.
The authors conclude that home-based, self-administered use was well tolerated, and that the findings support safety and feasibility and "justify an adequately powered, double-blind, sham-controlled trial".
What it could not show
This part matters as much as the results. The authors state that the uncontrolled design, the small subgroups and the reliance on self-report rule out conclusions about cause and effect. They also list unblinded adverse-event reporting, adherence that was self-reported and could not be verified, acoustic output that was not calibrated, and a likely expectancy or placebo effect. With no comparison group, an improvement in how people say they feel cannot be separated from the effect of taking part in a study at all.
So this study does not show that ultrasound improves memory, and we are not claiming that it does. What it gives us is what a feasibility pilot is for: evidence that the at-home protocol could be followed and was tolerated by the people who tried it, and a clear statement from the investigators of what a stronger study would need to look like.
Who did what
We think readers should know this. The paper discloses that Sterling Cooley was employed by Ultra DAO and originated the treatment protocol it evaluated, and that he intends to pursue future commercial work through Ultra DAO, including a programmable version of the US PRO 2000 that can be reflashed over NFC. That is the work you can see on our device page. The paper also states that he took no part in participant screening, outcome ascertainment, adverse-event adjudication or statistical analysis, and that data collection was run by the IONS research team.
What happens next
The investigators have said what the next step should be: a larger trial with a sham control and blinding on both sides. That is the standard any claim about ultrasound and cognition will eventually have to meet, and it is the kind of study a research DAO exists to help fund. You can follow our wider research directions on the research page, and read about how the DAO decides what to fund on the DAO page.
UltraDAO devices and frequency programs are wellness and research instruments. The PULSE system is not a medical device, is not FDA cleared, and nothing in this post is medical advice — no therapeutic claims are made. The study summarised here was an uncontrolled pilot whose authors state it cannot show cause and effect. Ultrasound neuromodulation is an active area of research; consult a qualified clinician for health decisions.