Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27378892›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2016

The Do's and Don'ts of Neurofeedback Training: A Review of the Controlled Studies Using Healthy Adults.

Jacek Rogala, Katarzyna Jurewicz, Katarzyna Paluch, Ewa Kublik, Ryszard Cetnarski, Andrzej Wróbel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The potential of real-time fMRI neurofeedback for stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Cognitive Training with Neurofeedback Using fNIRS Improves Cognitive Function in Older Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Neurofeedback: Applications, advancements, and future directions.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jacek RogalaLaboratory of Visual System, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
Katarzyna JurewiczLaboratory of Visual System, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
Katarzyna PaluchLaboratory of Visual System, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
Ewa KublikLaboratory of Visual System, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
Ryszard CetnarskiLaboratory of Visual System, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
Andrzej WróbelLaboratory of Visual System, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of EEG neurofeedback (EEG-NFB) training is to induce changes in the power of targeted EEG bands to produce beneficial changes in cognitive or motor function. The effectiveness of different EEG-NFB protocols can be measured using two dependent variables: (1) changes in EEG activity and (2) behavioral changes of a targeted function (for therapeutic applications the desired changes should be long-lasting). To firmly establish a causal link between these variables and the selected protocol, similar changes should not be observed when appropriate control paradigms are used. The main objective of this review is to evaluate the evidence, reported in the scientific literature, which supports the validity of various EEG-NFB protocols. Our primary concern is to highlight the role that uncontrolled nonspecific factors can play in the results generated from EEG-NFB studies. Nonspecific factors are often ignored in EEG-NFB designs or the data are not presented, which means conclusions should be interpreted cautiously. As an outcome of this review we present a do's and don'ts list, which can be used to develop future EEG-NFB methodologies, based on the small set of experiments in which the proper control groups have excluded non-EEG-NFB related effects. We found two features which positively correlated with the expected changes in power of the trained EEG band(s): (1) protocols which focused on training a smaller number of frequency bands and (2) a bigger number of electrodes used for neurofeedback training. However, we did not find evidence in support of the positive relationship between power changes of a trained frequency band(s) and specific behavioral effects.

Indexed as

EEGmethodologyneurofeedback trainingprotocol efficacyreplicability

Identifiers

PMID27378892
PMCPMC4911408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.