Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38053609›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in neuroscience2023

Clinical applications of neurofeedback based on sensorimotor rhythm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tatiana Ferri Ribeiro, Marcelo Alves Carriello, Eugenio Pereira de Paula, Amanda Carvalho Garcia, Guilherme Luiz da Rocha, Helio Afonso Ghizoni Teive

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Tatiana Ferri RibeiroInternal Medicine and Health Sciences, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Marcelo Alves CarrielloInternal Medicine and Health Sciences, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Eugenio Pereira de PaulaPhysical Education (UFPR)-Invited Colaborador, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Amanda Carvalho GarciaInternal Medicine and Health Sciences, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Guilherme Luiz da RochaInternal Medicine and Health Sciences, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Helio Afonso Ghizoni TeiveInternal Medicine and Health Sciences, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Paraná · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Among the brain-machine interfaces, neurofeedback is a non-invasive technique that uses sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) as a clinical intervention protocol. This study aimed to investigate the clinical applications of SMR neurofeedback to understand its clinical effectiveness in different pathologies or symptoms. Methods: A systematic review study with meta-analysis of the clinical applications of EEG-based SMR neurofeedback performed using pre-selected publication databases. A qualitative analysis of these studies was performed using the Consensus tool on the Reporting and Experimental Design of Neurofeedback studies (CRED-nf). The Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy was carried out using Review Manager software, version 5.4.1 (RevMan 5; Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Results: The qualitative analysis includes 44 studies, of which only 27 studies had some kind of control condition, five studies were double-blinded, and only three reported a blind follow-up throughout the intervention. The meta-analysis included a total sample of 203 individuals between stroke and fibromyalgia. Studies on multiple sclerosis, insomnia, quadriplegia, paraplegia, and mild cognitive impairment were excluded due to the absence of a control group or results based only on post-intervention scales. Statistical analysis indicated that stroke patients did not benefit from neurofeedback interventions when compared to other therapies (Std. mean. dif. 0.31, 95% CI 0.03-0.60, Conclusion: We conclude that although neurofeedback based on electrophysiological patterns of SMR contemplates the interest of numerous researchers and the existence of research that presents promising results, it is currently not possible to point out the clinical benefits of the technique as a form of clinical intervention. Therefore, it is necessary to develop more robust studies with a greater sample of a more rigorous methodology to understand the benefits that the technique can provide to the population.

Indexed as

neurologianeuropsiquiatríapathologysensory motor rhythmstandard therapy

Identifiers

PMID38053609
PMCPMC10694284
OpenAlexW4388830097

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.