Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36661637›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Both Sensorimotor Rhythm Neurofeedback and Self-Controlled Practice Enhance Motor Learning and Performance in Novice Golfers.

Zahra Pourbehbahani, Esmaeel Saemi, Ming-Yang Cheng, Mohammad Reza Dehghan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Motor learning in golf-a systematic review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Zahra PourbehbahaniDepartment of Motor Behavior and Sport Psychology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz 6135783151, Iran.
Esmaeel SaemiDepartment of Motor Behavior and Sport Psychology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz 6135783151, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-2265-9482
Ming-Yang ChengSchool of Psychology, Beijing Sport University, No. 48 Xinxi Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100084, China.
Mohammad Reza DehghanDepartment of Sport Physiology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz 6135783151, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A major concern voiced by motor behavior scientists is to find useful practice techniques that can be effective in improving motor learning and performance. Neurofeedback and self-controlled practice are among the techniques that have recently drawn attention from specialists in this area. The present study examined the additive and individual effects of sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) neurofeedback as well as self-controlled practice on motor learning and performance in novice golfers. In this semi-empirical study, forty adults (20 females, Meanage = 26.10, SD = 5.56 years) were conveniently selected and randomly assigned to four groups: (1) neurofeedback/self-controlled practice, (2) neurofeedback/yoked practice, (3) sham/self-controlled practice, and (4) sham/yoked practice. The participants performed golf putting task in four stages, namely pretest (12 trials), intervention (one day after pretest; 6 sessions, 36 trails each), post-test (one day after intervention; 12 trials), and follow-up (two weeks after interventions; 12 trials). In addition, the participants had their EEG (SMR wave in Cz point) recorded during pretest, post-test, and follow-up. The results indicated that, although no additive effect was observed for the two practices during different stages of the experiment (p > 0.05), in acquisition and post-test stages, SMR neurofeedback and self-controlled practice independently facilitated golf putting (p ≤ 0.05). However, in the follow-up test, only the neurofeedback practice maintained its positive effects (p ≤ 0.05). The results also showed that participation in SMR neurofeedback practice can enhance the power of the SMR wave (p ≤ 0.05), regardless of the type of the self-controlled practice used. In sum, the two practice techniques seem to be independently effective in facilitating motor learning in instructional settings, particularly for golfers.

Indexed as

additive effectgolf putting taskmotor learningSMR neurofeedbackyoked practice

Identifiers

PMID36661637
PMCPMC9854920

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.