ArticleBrain topography2024
Assessing the Effectiveness of Audio-Visual vs. Visual Neurofeedback for Attention Enhancement: A Pilot Study with Neurological, Behavioural, and Neuropsychological Measures.
Article in Brain topography, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Research on auditory neurofeedback technology and its multi-disciplinary applications].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026Review
- Meditation and neurofeedback: A systematic scoping review, synthesis, and future directions.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electroencephalogram (EEG) based Neurofeedback training has gained traction as a practical method for enhancing executive functions, particularly attention, among healthy individuals. The neurofeedback protocols based on EEG channel locations, frequency bands, or EEG features has been tested. However, the improvement in attention was not measured by comparing different feedback stimulus types. We believe that multisensory nature feedback even with few training sessions may induce strong effect. Therefore, this study compares the effect of audio-visual and visual feedback stimuli for attention enhancement utilizing neurophysiological, behavioural and neuropsychological measures. Total 21 subjects were recruited, undergoing six alternate days of neurofeedback training sessions to upregulate EEG beta power of frontocentral (FC5). Dwell time, fractional occupancy and transition probability were also estimated from the EEG beta power. Audiovisual group (G1) as compared to visual group (G2) demonstrate a significant increase of global EEG beta activity alongside improved dwell time (t = 2.76, p = 0.003), fractional occupancy (t = 1.73, p = 0.042) and transition probability (t = 2.46, p = 0.008) over the course of six neurofeedback training sessions. Similarly, the group (G1) shows higher scores (t = 2.13, p = 0.032) and faster reaction times (t = 2.22, p = 0.028) in Stroop task, along with increased score in Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS-15) questionnaire (t = 2.306, p = 0.012). Audiovisual neurofeedback may enhance training effectiveness, potentially achieving the same outcomes in fewer sessions compared to visual-only feedback. However, sufficient training days are essential for effect consolidation. This highlights the feasibility of completing neurofeedback training, a significant challenge in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39397132What 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.