Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40270441›Full record

SynthesisScandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports2025

The Effect of EEG Neurofeedback Training on Sport Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chien-Lin Yu, Ming-Yang Cheng, Xin An, Ting-Yu Chueh, Jia-Hao Wu, Kuo-Pin Wang, Tsung-Min Hung

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors.

Chien-Lin YuDepartment of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-0353-9397
Ming-Yang ChengDepartment of Sport Science Research, Taiwan Institute of Sports Science, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Xin AnSchool of Psychology, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China.
Ting-Yu ChuehMaster's Program of Transition and Leisure Education for Individuals With Disabilities, University of Taipei, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Jia-Hao WuDepartment of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kuo-Pin WangCognitive Interaction Technology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8097-7927
Tsung-Min HungDepartment of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-8118-0837

Funding

Deutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMinistry of Science and Technology of Taiwan 112WFA0310075Universität Bielefeld
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurofeedback training (NFT) has emerged as a promising technique for enhancing sports performance by enabling individuals to self-regulate their neural activity. However, only 53% of the 13 included studies, all of which published before 2021, in the latest meta-analyses of NFT and motor performance focused on motor performance outcomes. Due to the rapid development of neurofeedback, 8 high-quality articles were published in 2023-2024 alone. Therefore, there is a need for a new meta-analysis to update the impact of NFT on sports performance. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we have not only reassessed the knowledge of the effect of EEG neurofeedback in motor performance but have also incorporated a standardized methodology, known as the CRED-nf checklist (Consensus on the reporting and experimental design of clinical and cognitive-behavioral neurofeedback studies), for methodological evaluation of previous EEG neurofeedback studies. The study protocol was pre-registered, and a systematic search was conducted across major databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. A total of 25 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, with 21 studies eligible for the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed a moderate positive effect of NFT on sport motor tasks, with a Hedges's g of 0.78 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.49-1.07. Importantly, subgroup analyses showed that studies with higher methodological quality scores, as assessed by the CRED-nf checklist, had significantly larger effect sizes (Hedges's g = 1.07) compared to lower than median studies (Hedges's g = 0.49). This finding highlights the importance of addressing key methodological gaps, such as reporting on participant strategies, data processing methods, and the relationship between regulation success and behavioral outcomes. In conclusion, NFT showcases a moderate positive impact on sport motor task, particularly when high-quality methodologies are employed, as assessed by the CRED-nf checklist, underscoring the importance of rigorous study designs in future research.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceElectroencephalographyNeurofeedbackHumansMotor Skillsmeta‐analysismotor performanceneurofeedbackreviewsport performance

Identifiers

PMID40270441
PMCPMC12019780

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.