Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32947225›Full record

ReviewNeuroImage. Clinical2020

Advances in biofeedback and neurofeedback studies on smoking.

N Pandria, A Athanasiou, L Konstantara, M Karagianni, P D Bamidis

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Genetically influenced externalizing and internalizing risk pathways as novel prevention targets.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2022
    Trial
  3. Neurofeedback: Applications, advancements, and future directions.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Brain-computer Interaction in the Smart Era.Current medical science · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Editorial: Clinical Neurofeedback.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

N PandriaLab of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece; Northern Greece Neurofeedback Center, Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: npandria@auth.gr.
A AthanasiouLab of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: athalkinoos@auth.gr.
L KonstantaraLab of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: lkonsta@auth.gr.
M KaragianniLab of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: mkaragianni.psy@gmail.com.
P D BamidisLab of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: bamidis@auth.gr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Smoking is a leading cause of morbidity and premature death constituting a global health challenge. Although, pharmacological and behavioral approaches comprise the mainstay of smoking cessation interventions, the efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy is not demonstrated for some populations. Non-pharmacological approaches, such as biofeedback (BF) and neurofeedback (NF) could facilitate self-regulation of predisposing factors of relapse such as craving and stress. The current review aims to aggregate the existing evidence regarding the effects of BF and NF training on smokers. Relevant studies were identified through searching in Scopus, PubMed and Cochrane Library, and through hand-searching the references of screened articles. Peer-reviewed controlled and uncontrolled studies, where BF and/or NF training was administered, were included and evaluated according to PICOS framework. Narrative qualitative synthesis of ten eligible studies was performed, aggregated into three categories according to training provided. BF outcomes seem to be affected by smoking behavior prior to training; individualized EEG NF training holds promise for modulating craving-related response while minimizing the required number of sessions. Real-time fMRI NF studies concluded that nicotine-dependent individuals could modulate craving-related brain responses, while mixed results were revealed regarding smokers' ability to modulate brain responses related to resistance towards the urge to smoke. BF and NF training seem to facilitate modulation of autonomous and/or central nervous system activity while also transferring this learned self-regulation to behavioral outcomes. BF and NF training should a) address remaining issues on specificity and scientific validity, b) target diverse demographics, and c) produce robust reproducible methodologies and clinical guidelines for relevant health care providers, in order to be considered as viable complementary tools to standard smoking cessation care.

Indexed as

NeurofeedbackSmoking CessationTobacco Use DisorderCravingHumansSmokingBiofeedbackElectroencephalogramNeurofeedbackNicotine addictionReal-time functional magnetic resonance imagingSmokingSystematic reviewTobacco consumption

Identifiers

PMID32947225
PMCPMC7502375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.