ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Efficacy of neurofeedback training for improving attentional performance in healthy adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Posterior cingulate cortex downregulation training using fMRI neurofeedback in adolescents with early life adversity exposure: a randomized, single-blind trial.Translational psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Task-Based EEG Neurofeedback Enhances Training Effects in Dynamic Visual Search.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2026Article
- Exploring protocol development: Implementing systematic contextual memory to enhance real-time fMRI neurofeedback.Journal of electrical bioimpedance · 2024Article
- Pretraining alpha rhythm enhancement by neurofeedback facilitates short-term perceptual learning and improves visual acuity by facilitated consolidation.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the neurofeedback training (NFT) effects on attentional performance in healthy adults. Six databases were searched until June 2022 to identify parallel randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating attentional improvements after NFT. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. We identified 41 RCTs for qualitative synthesis and 15 RCTs (569 participants) for meta-analysis. The overall NFT effect on attentional performance was significant (standardized mean difference = 0.27, 95% confidence interval = 0.10-0.44). However, no significant pooled effect was found within the trials comparing its effect with sham-NFT (eight RCTs). Additionally, variable effects were observed on individual subsets of attentional performance. Further sham-controlled RCTs are required to validate the improvement of attentional performance with NFT.
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.