ReviewAJOB neuroscience
Ethical and Legal Considerations of Alternative Neurotherapies.
Review in AJOB neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethical challenges in EEG neurofeedback: a systematic review of gaps, risks, and responsibilities.BMC medical ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Alpha power increases spontaneously during a neurofeedback session.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Spontaneous Modulation of Standard EEG Frequency Bands During a Neurofeedback-Like Task.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Stakeholder perspectives on non-invasive brain stimulation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A comparative review on neuroethical issues in neuroscientific and neuroethical journals.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Review
- Opportunity Cost or Opportunity Lost: An Empirical Assessment of Ethical Concerns and Attitudes of EEG Neurofeedback Users.Neuroethics · 2022Article
- Brain Wellness "Spas"-Anticipating the Off-label Promotion of Psychedelics.JAMA psychiatry · 2022Article
- The public impact of academic and print media portrayals of TMS: shining a spotlight on discrepancies in the literature.BMC medical ethics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neurotherapies for diagnostics and treatment-such as electroencephalography (EEG) neurofeedback, single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) imaging for neuropsychiatric evaluation, and off-label/experimental uses of brain stimulation-are continuously being offered to the public outside mainstream healthcare settings. Because these neurotherapies share many key features of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) techniques-and meet the definition of CAM as set out in Kaptchuk and Eisenberg-here we refer to them as "alternative neurotherapies." By explicitly linking these alternative neurotherapy practices under a common conceptual framework, this paper draws attention to, and critically considers, the cross-cutting ethical and legal issues related to the provision of these services. The first section of this paper provides an updated empirical overview of uses of SPECT neuropsychiatric evaluations, EEG neurofeedback, and experimental/off-label forms of brain stimulation. Next, drawing on CAM bioethics scholarship, we highlight the pertinent ethical issues in the alternative neurotherapy context, including the truthful representation of evidence base, marketing to vulnerable populations, potential harms, provider competency, and conflicts of interest. Finally, we consider the principal legal issues at stake for the provision of alternative neurotherapies in the U.S., namely those related to licensing and scope-of-practice considerations. We conclude with recommendations for future research in this domain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.