Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34164596›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice2020

Neuroenhancement for sale: assessing the website claims of neurofeedback providers in the United States.

Anna Wexler, Ashwini Nagappan, Deena Kopyto, Rebekah Choi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

4 authors.

Anna WexlerDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania.
Ashwini NagappanDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania.
Deena KopytoDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania.
Rebekah ChoiDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania.

Funding

Do-it-Yourself and Direct-to-Consumer Medicine and Science: Assessing the Public Health Issues and Regulatory GapsDP5OD026420 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WEXLER, ANNA · 2018 to 2022
$2.0M
NIH HHS DP5 OD026420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback is a technique that has been in existence for many decades, it has remained controversial, largely due to questions about efficacy. Yet neurofeedback is being widely offered to the public, often at great expense. To date, however, there has not been empirical data on which providers are utilizing neurofeedback, what they are offering it for, and how they are advertising the technique. The present study aimed to fill that gap by systematically analyzing the websites of neurofeedback practitioners in the United States. To that end, we obtained data from four directories of neurofeedback providers, extracting practitioner names, geographical locations, professional training, and website URLs. Only websites offering neurofeedback services (N=371) were included in the next step, wherein two coders independently coded the websites based on a codebook developed from preliminary analyses. We found that nearly all websites (97.0%) contained claims about at least one clinical indication, most commonly anxiety, ADHD/ADD, and depression; however, only 36.0% of providers had either a medical degree (MD) or a doctoral-level degree in psychology. The majority of websites advertised neurofeedback for cognitive (90.0%) or performance (67.9%) enhancement, and roughly three-quarters utilized language related to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). In sum, there is a considerable divergence between the scientific literature on neurofeedback and the marketing of neurofeedback services to the general public, raising concerns regarding the misrepresentation of services and misleading advertising claims.

Indexed as

cognitive enhancementEEGneuroethicsneurofeedbackneuroscience and society

Identifiers

PMID34164596
PMCPMC8218893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.