Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39428883›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024

Neurofeedback: potential for abuse and regulatory frameworks in the United States.

Fiona Furnari, Haesoo Park, Gideon Yaffe, Michelle Hampson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    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.

Fiona FurnariYale Law School , New Haven, CT 06511, USA.
Haesoo ParkDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine , New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Gideon Yaffe *Yale Law School , New Haven, CT 06511, USA.
Michelle Hampson *Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine , New Haven, CT 06510, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3173-4210

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Neurofeedback from the supplementary motor area for Tourette SyndromeR01MH127147 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Michelle Hampson · 2022 to 2026
$3.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH127147Yale Law School
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurofeedback is a brain-training technique that continues to develop via ongoing innovations, and that has broadening potential impact. Once confined primarily to clinical and research settings, it is increasingly being used in the general population. Such development raises concerns about the current regulatory mechanisms and their adequacy in protecting patterns of economic and political decision-making from the novel technology. As studies have found neurofeedback to change subjects' preferences and mental associations covertly, there is a possibility it will be abused for political and commercial gains. Current regulatory practices (including disclaimer requirements, unfair and deceptive trade practice statutes and undue influence law) may be avenues from which to regulate neurofeedback influence. They are, however, limited. Regulating neurofeedback will face the line-drawing problem of determining when it induces an unacceptable level of influence. We suggest experiments that will clarify how the parameters of neurofeedback training affect its level of influence. In addition, we assert that the reactive nature of the traditional models of regulation will be inadequate against this and other rapidly transforming technologies. An integrated and proactive regulatory system designed for flexibility must be adopted to protect society in this era of modern technological advancement. This article is part of the theme issue 'Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation'.

Indexed as

NeurofeedbackHumansUnited Statesimplicit neurofeedbackimplicit traininglawneurofeedbacktechnology regulationsundue influence

Identifiers

PMID39428883
PMCPMC11513161

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.