ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Systematic review and meta-analysis of neurofeedback training efficacy and neural mechanisms in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subjective regulation success mediates the influence of neurofeedback performance on mood in the absence of training effects.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Neurofeedback in the treatment of psychological disorders has gained increasingly widespread interest in recent years. As the use of neurofeedback training expands, it is important to elucidate its treatment efficacy, especially for prevalent and debilitating psychopathologies such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Likewise, furthering our understanding of the underlying neural mechanisms by which neurofeedback acts is also necessary. Methods: Here, we present the results of a PROSPERO registered (protocol number: CRD42020184659) meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of neurofeedback training for treatment of PTSD in adults. We evaluate the efficacy of different neurofeedback modalities used to treat PTSD, including functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback (fMRI-NF) and electroencephalogram neurofeedback (EEG-NF). We also differentiate active control (sham or yoked sham) studies from passive control (waitlist, treatment as usual, no treatment, and any non-neurofeedback based intervention) studies. Results: Our results show that EEG-NF has a moderate to large effect in reducing PTSD symptoms pre- to post-treatment compared to passive controls (k = 5). Two fMRI-NF RCTs, both using sham controls, showed no improvement in PTSD symptoms, pre- to post-treatment. However, our confidence in these findings is very low to low due to concerns regarding risk of bias, imprecision, and conflicts of interest. Neurofeedback in passive control studies outperformed neurofeedback in active control studies relative to their respective control treatment arms. We also synthesized the neural results from these studies and found that between-group neural effects were generally inconclusive. Discussion: These findings highlight the need for improved controls in studies examining neurofeedback for PTSD to reliably determine whether neurofeedback training, or other factors, are the basis for improvements in PTSD symptoms. We elaborate on some of the underlying neural mechanisms by which neurofeedback training shows potential in improving PTSD symptoms to guide future developments and provide recommendations for future neurofeedback interventions in treating PTSD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.