Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34679358›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2021

A Systematic Review of Neurofeedback for the Management of Motor Symptoms in Parkinson's Disease.

Krithika Anil, Stephen D Hall, Sara Demain, Jennifer A Freeman, Giorgio Ganis, Jonathan Marsden

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Krithika AnilPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Derriford Road, Plymouth PL6 8BH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8027-1665
Stephen D HallBrain Research and Imaging Centre, Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Research Way, Plymouth PL6 8BU, UK.
Sara DemainSchool of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
Jennifer A FreemanPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Derriford Road, Plymouth PL6 8BH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4072-9758
Giorgio GanisBrain Research and Imaging Centre, Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Research Way, Plymouth PL6 8BU, UK.
Jonathan MarsdenPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Derriford Road, Plymouth PL6 8BH, UK.
University of Plymouth · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeurofeedback has been proposed as a treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD) motor symptoms by changing the neural network activity directly linked with movement. However, the effectiveness of neurofeedback as a treatment for PD motor symptoms is unclear.

aimTo systematically review the literature to identify the effects of neurofeedback in people with idiopathic PD; as defined by measurement of brain activity; motor function; and performance.

designA systematic review. Included Sources and Articles: PubMed; MEDLINE; Cinhal; PsychoInfo; Prospero; Cochrane; ClinicalTrials.gov; EMBASE; Web of Science; PEDro; OpenGrey; Conference Paper Index; Google Scholar; and eThos; searched using the Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) framework. Primary studies with the following designs were included: randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs; quasi-experimental; pre/post studies; and case studies.

resultsThis review included 11 studies out of 6197 studies that were identified from the literature search. Neuroimaging methods used were fMRI; scalp EEG; surface brain EEG; and deep brain EEG; where 10-15 Hz and the supplementary motor area were the most commonly targeted signatures for EEG and fMRI, respectively. Success rates for changing one's brain activity ranged from 47% to 100%; however, both sample sizes and success criteria differed considerably between studies. While six studies included a clinical outcome; a lack of consistent assessments prevented a reliable conclusion on neurofeedback's effectiveness. Narratively, fMRI neurofeedback has the greatest potential to improve PD motor symptoms. Two main limitations were found in the studies that contributed to the lack of a confident conclusion: (1) insufficient clinical information and perspectives (e.g., no reporting of adverse events), and (2) limitations in numerical data reporting (e.g., lack of explicit statistics) that prevented a meta-analysis.

conclusionsWhile fMRI neurofeedback was narratively the most effective treatment; the omission of clinical outcome measures in studies using other neurofeedback approaches limits comparison. Therefore, no single neurofeedback type can currently be identified as an optimal treatment for PD motor symptoms. This systematic review highlights the need to improve the inclusion of clinical information and more robust reporting of numerical data in future work. Neurofeedback appears to hold great potential as a treatment for PD motor symptoms. However, this field is still in its infancy and needs high quality RCTs to establish its effectiveness. Review Registration: PROSPERO (ID: CRD42020191097).

Indexed as

electroencephalographymovementneural network activityneurofeedbackneuroimagingParkinson’s disease

Identifiers

PMID34679358
PMCPMC8534214
OpenAlexW3201741857

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.