ReviewJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Comparative effectiveness of electroencephalogram-neurofeedback training of 3-45 frequency band on memory in healthy population: a network meta-analysis with systematic literature search.
Review in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing the Effects of Dairy and Soybean on Bone Health in Women: A Food- and Component-Level Network Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2025Pooled it
- Neural Modification Through the Low-Frequency Band: Effects on Anxiety, Sleep Quality, and Under Pressure Shooting Performance.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2026Article
- Mapping the Digital Mind: A Meta-Analysis of EEG Biomarkers in Cognition, Emotion, and Mental Health.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Mapping EEG Metrics to Human Affective and Cognitive Models: An Interdisciplinary Scoping Review from a Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Acute Effects of Portable Dry-EEG Neurofeedback on Classical Chinese Learning: A Three-Arm Repeated-Measures Study.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
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
objectiveTo investigate which brain activity frequency of electroencephalogram (EEG)-neurofeedback training (NFT) was the most effective for enhancing working memory (WM) and episodic memory (EM) in healthy participants through network meta-analysis (NMA).
methodsSearched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies published from January 1990 to January 2025. We performed Bayesian NMA, pooling continuous outcome data using the standardized mean difference effect size (ES). Global and local evaluations of inconsistency were conducted using the chi-square test, side-splitting, and loop-specific approaches. A consistency model was applied and the global approach to inconsistency showed no significance. Efficacy ranks were determined using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for each intervention. Publication bias was assessed using the comparison-adjusted funnel plot and Egger's test. Finally, sensitivity analysis confirmed our findings' robustness.
resultsSixty studies were included, comprising 50 trials on WM and 24 trials on EM. While the global inconsistency analysis showed no significant inconsistency for WM (χ
conclusionThrough NMA, alpha activity (7-13 Hz) may be a crucial frequency impacting memory. Brain activity combined with other training methods requires more robust studies for future investigation. This study registered with www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ (CRD42024539656).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.