The Lack of Neurofeedback Training Regulation Guidance and Process Evaluation May be a Source of Controversy in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder-Neurofeedback Research: A Systematic Review and Statistical Analysis.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Peng Ding, Lize Tan, He Pan, Anming Gong, Wenya Nan, Yunfa Fu
{"title":"The Lack of Neurofeedback Training Regulation Guidance and Process Evaluation May be a Source of Controversy in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder-Neurofeedback Research: A Systematic Review and Statistical Analysis.","authors":"Peng Ding, Lize Tan, He Pan, Anming Gong, Wenya Nan, Yunfa Fu","doi":"10.1089/brain.2024.0084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objectives:</i></b> Neurofeedback (NF) based on brain-computer interface (BCI) is an important direction in adjunctive interventions for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, existing research lacks comprehensive methodologies and experimental designs. There are concerns in the field regarding the effectiveness and mechanistic interpretability of NF, prompting this study to conduct a systematic analysis of primary NF techniques and research outcomes in PTSD modulation. The study aims to explore reasons behind these concerns and propose directions for addressing them. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A search conducted in the Web of Science database up to December 1, 2023, yielded 111 English articles, of which 80 were excluded based on predetermined criteria irrelevant to this study. The remaining 31 original studies were included in the literature review. A checklist was developed to assess the robustness and credibility of these 31 studies. Subsequently, these original studies were classified into electroencephalogram-based NF (EEG-NF) and functional magnetic resonance imaging-based NF (fMRI-NF) based on BCI type. Data regarding target brain regions, target signals, modulation protocols, control group types, assessment methods, data processing strategies, and reported outcomes were extracted and synthesized. Consensus theories from existing research and directions for future improvements in related studies were distilled. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Analysis of all included studies revealed that the average sample size of PTSD patients in EEG and fMRI NF studies was 17.4 (SD 7.13) and 14.6 (SD 6.37), respectively. Due to sample and neurofeedback training protocol constraints, 93% of EEG-NF studies and 87.5% of fMRI-NF studies used traditional statistical methods, with minimal utilization of basic machine learning (ML) methods and no studies utilizing deep learning (DL) methods. Apart from approximately 25% of fMRI NF studies supporting exploratory psychoregulatory strategies, the remaining EEG and fMRI studies lacked explicit NF modulation guidance. Only 13% of studies evaluated NF effectiveness methods involving signal classification, decoding during the NF process, and lacking in process monitoring and assessment means. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> In summary, NF holds promise as an adjunctive intervention technique for PTSD, potentially aiding in symptom alleviation for PTSD patients. However, improvements are necessary in the process evaluation mechanisms for PTSD-NF, clarity in NF modulation guidance, and development of ML/DL methods suitable for PTSD-NF with small sample sizes. To address these challenges, it is crucial to adopt more rigorous methodologies for monitoring NF, and future research should focus on the integration of advanced data analysis techniques to enhance the effectiveness and precision of PTSD-NF interventions. Impact Statement The implications of this study are to address the limited application of Neurofeedback training (NFT) in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) research, where a significant portion of the approaches, foundational research, and conclusions lack consensus. There is a notable absence of retrospective statistical analyses on NFT interventions for PTSD. This study provides a comprehensive statistical analysis and discussion of existing research, offering valuable insights for future studies. The findings hold significance for researchers, clinicians, and practitioners in the field, providing a foundation for informed, evidence-based interventions for PTSD treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":9155,"journal":{"name":"Brain connectivity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain connectivity","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/brain.2024.0084","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Neurofeedback (NF) based on brain-computer interface (BCI) is an important direction in adjunctive interventions for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, existing research lacks comprehensive methodologies and experimental designs. There are concerns in the field regarding the effectiveness and mechanistic interpretability of NF, prompting this study to conduct a systematic analysis of primary NF techniques and research outcomes in PTSD modulation. The study aims to explore reasons behind these concerns and propose directions for addressing them. Methods: A search conducted in the Web of Science database up to December 1, 2023, yielded 111 English articles, of which 80 were excluded based on predetermined criteria irrelevant to this study. The remaining 31 original studies were included in the literature review. A checklist was developed to assess the robustness and credibility of these 31 studies. Subsequently, these original studies were classified into electroencephalogram-based NF (EEG-NF) and functional magnetic resonance imaging-based NF (fMRI-NF) based on BCI type. Data regarding target brain regions, target signals, modulation protocols, control group types, assessment methods, data processing strategies, and reported outcomes were extracted and synthesized. Consensus theories from existing research and directions for future improvements in related studies were distilled. Results: Analysis of all included studies revealed that the average sample size of PTSD patients in EEG and fMRI NF studies was 17.4 (SD 7.13) and 14.6 (SD 6.37), respectively. Due to sample and neurofeedback training protocol constraints, 93% of EEG-NF studies and 87.5% of fMRI-NF studies used traditional statistical methods, with minimal utilization of basic machine learning (ML) methods and no studies utilizing deep learning (DL) methods. Apart from approximately 25% of fMRI NF studies supporting exploratory psychoregulatory strategies, the remaining EEG and fMRI studies lacked explicit NF modulation guidance. Only 13% of studies evaluated NF effectiveness methods involving signal classification, decoding during the NF process, and lacking in process monitoring and assessment means. Conclusion: In summary, NF holds promise as an adjunctive intervention technique for PTSD, potentially aiding in symptom alleviation for PTSD patients. However, improvements are necessary in the process evaluation mechanisms for PTSD-NF, clarity in NF modulation guidance, and development of ML/DL methods suitable for PTSD-NF with small sample sizes. To address these challenges, it is crucial to adopt more rigorous methodologies for monitoring NF, and future research should focus on the integration of advanced data analysis techniques to enhance the effectiveness and precision of PTSD-NF interventions. Impact Statement The implications of this study are to address the limited application of Neurofeedback training (NFT) in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) research, where a significant portion of the approaches, foundational research, and conclusions lack consensus. There is a notable absence of retrospective statistical analyses on NFT interventions for PTSD. This study provides a comprehensive statistical analysis and discussion of existing research, offering valuable insights for future studies. The findings hold significance for researchers, clinicians, and practitioners in the field, providing a foundation for informed, evidence-based interventions for PTSD treatment.

缺乏神经反馈训练调节指导和过程评估可能是创伤后应激障碍-神经反馈研究的争议来源:系统回顾和统计分析。
目的:基于脑机接口(BCI)的神经反馈(NF)是创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)辅助干预的重要方向。然而,现有的研究缺乏全面的方法和实验设计。由于对NF的有效性和机制可解释性的关注,本研究对NF在PTSD调节中的主要技术和研究成果进行了系统的分析。本研究旨在探讨这些问题背后的原因,并提出解决这些问题的方向。方法:截至2023年12月1日,在Web of Science数据库中检索到111篇英文文章,其中80篇根据与本研究无关的预定标准被排除。其余31项原始研究纳入文献综述。我们制定了一个检查表来评估这31项研究的稳健性和可信性。随后,根据BCI类型将这些原始研究分为基于脑电图的NF (EEG-NF)和基于功能磁共振成像的NF (fMRI-NF)。提取和合成有关目标脑区、目标信号、调制方案、对照组类型、评估方法、数据处理策略和报告结果的数据。总结了已有研究的共识理论和今后相关研究的改进方向。结果:对所有纳入研究的分析显示,EEG和fMRI NF研究中PTSD患者的平均样本量分别为17.4 (SD 7.13)和14.6 (SD 6.37)。由于样本和神经反馈训练协议的限制,93%的EEG-NF研究和87.5%的fMRI-NF研究使用了传统的统计方法,基本机器学习(ML)方法的使用很少,没有研究使用深度学习(DL)方法。除了大约25%的fMRI NF研究支持探索性心理调节策略外,其余的EEG和fMRI研究缺乏明确的NF调节指导。仅13%的研究评估了NF有效性方法,包括NF过程中的信号分类和解码,缺乏过程监测和评估手段。结论:综上所述,NF有望作为PTSD的辅助干预技术,有助于缓解PTSD患者的症状。然而,需要改进PTSD-NF的过程评估机制,明确NF调制指导,以及开发适合小样本量PTSD-NF的ML/DL方法。为了应对这些挑战,采用更严格的方法监测创伤后应激障碍至关重要,未来的研究应侧重于整合先进的数据分析技术,以提高创伤后应激障碍干预措施的有效性和准确性。本研究的意义是解决神经反馈训练(NFT)在创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)研究中的有限应用,其中很大一部分的方法,基础研究和结论缺乏共识。值得注意的是,缺乏对NFT干预PTSD的回顾性统计分析。本研究对现有研究进行了全面的统计分析和讨论,为未来的研究提供了有价值的见解。这些发现对研究人员、临床医生和该领域的从业人员具有重要意义,为创伤后应激障碍治疗的知情、循证干预提供了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain connectivity
Brain connectivity Neuroscience-General Neuroscience
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Brain Connectivity provides groundbreaking findings in the rapidly advancing field of connectivity research at the systems and network levels. The Journal disseminates information on brain mapping, modeling, novel research techniques, new imaging modalities, preclinical animal studies, and the translation of research discoveries from the laboratory to the clinic. This essential journal fosters the application of basic biological discoveries and contributes to the development of novel diagnostic and therapeutic interventions to recognize and treat a broad range of neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders such as: Alzheimer’s disease, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, epilepsy, traumatic brain injury, stroke, dementia, and depression.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信