ArticleExperimental brain research2025
Sustained attention in attention-deficit subjects and the impact of binaural beat stimulation evaluated by behavior and EEG.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent research on binaural beat stimulation has raised the question whether it can improve sustained attention. Neurotypicals and subjects with attention deficits of single gender performed a visual attention task under auditory noise, monoaural and binaural beat stimulation, while recording electroencephalographic activity. We found that subjects with attention deficits perform with longer reaction times than neurotypical subjects. To explore EEG activity, two periods of interest were distinguished: before a correct detection and before a miss, supposed to reflect respectively moments of engagement versus disengagement of attention. Under noise stimulation, neurotypicals have larger frontal ERP-components P300 and α-spectral power and lower parietal [Formula: see text] spectral power ratio in correct trials than in missed trials, whereas subjects with attention deficits show the inverse relation. Moreover, neurotypicals exhibit a negative relation of frontal δ-power and [Formula: see text] ratio in a time window of 6s before targets, whereas subjects with attention deficits show positively related δ- and α-power in this time window. Binaural beats diversify these results. Neurotypical subjects respond with a longer reaction time compared to noise stimulation, while attention-deficit subjects respond equally. Moreover, frontal P300 and α-power and parietal [Formula: see text] ratio resemble corresponding results under noise stimulation, whereas brain activity in subjects with attention deficits is rather heterogeneous. In addition, in attention-deficit subjects frontal and parietal δ- and α-power are positively related in a 6s time window before targets. In sum, under noise stimulation we found behavioral and electrophysiological biomarkers, which were inverse in neurotypicals and subjects with attention deficits. Binaural beats break up these relations in both subject groups and they have not been found to be beneficial, neither in behavior nor in electrophysiological biomarkers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40938421What 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.