Is There Evidence for EEG-Neurofeedback Specificity in the Treatment of Internalizing Disorders? A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Q3 Medicine

NeuroRegulation Pub Date : 2021-03-28 DOI:10.15540/NR.8.1.22

T. Perez, P. Glue, D. Adhia, Jerin Mathew, D. Deridder

{"title":"Is There Evidence for EEG-Neurofeedback Specificity in the Treatment of Internalizing Disorders? A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"T. Perez, P. Glue, D. Adhia, Jerin Mathew, D. Deridder","doi":"10.15540/NR.8.1.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : Mental illnesses are increasing worldwide with the internalizing disorders (IDs; e.g., anxiety disorders, depressive disorders) being the most prevalent. Current first-line therapies (e.g., pharmacotherapy) offer high failure rates and substantial side effects. Electroencephalographic neurofeedback (EEG-NFB) has been shown to be an effective and safe treatment for these conditions; however, there remains much doubt regarding the existence of specificity (i.e., clinical effects specific to the modulation of the EEG variables of interest). This is a protocol for a quantitative review that will attempt to determine if there is evidence for EEG-NFB specificity in the treatment of IDs. Methods : We will consider all published and unpublished randomized, double-blind (i.e., trainees and raters), sham/placebo-controlled (i.e., feedback contingent on a random signal, the activity from a different person’s brain, or an unrelated signal from the trainee’s own brain) trials involving humans with at least one ID diagnosis without exclusion by language, locality, ethnicity, age, or sex. Effect sizes will be calculated for individual studies and combined in a meta-analysis. Discussion : This protocol outlines the research methodology for a quantitative review undertaken to assess for evidence of EEG-NFB specificity in the treatment of","PeriodicalId":37439,"journal":{"name":"NeuroRegulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NeuroRegulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15540/NR.8.1.22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background : Mental illnesses are increasing worldwide with the internalizing disorders (IDs; e.g., anxiety disorders, depressive disorders) being the most prevalent. Current first-line therapies (e.g., pharmacotherapy) offer high failure rates and substantial side effects. Electroencephalographic neurofeedback (EEG-NFB) has been shown to be an effective and safe treatment for these conditions; however, there remains much doubt regarding the existence of specificity (i.e., clinical effects specific to the modulation of the EEG variables of interest). This is a protocol for a quantitative review that will attempt to determine if there is evidence for EEG-NFB specificity in the treatment of IDs. Methods : We will consider all published and unpublished randomized, double-blind (i.e., trainees and raters), sham/placebo-controlled (i.e., feedback contingent on a random signal, the activity from a different person’s brain, or an unrelated signal from the trainee’s own brain) trials involving humans with at least one ID diagnosis without exclusion by language, locality, ethnicity, age, or sex. Effect sizes will be calculated for individual studies and combined in a meta-analysis. Discussion : This protocol outlines the research methodology for a quantitative review undertaken to assess for evidence of EEG-NFB specificity in the treatment of

查看原文本刊更多论文

有证据表明脑电图-神经反馈在治疗内化障碍中的特异性吗?系统评价和荟萃分析方案

背景：精神疾病在世界范围内不断增加，其中内化障碍（ID；例如焦虑症、抑郁障碍）最为普遍。目前的一线治疗（如药物治疗）有很高的失败率和严重的副作用。脑电图神经反馈（EEG-NFB）已被证明是治疗这些疾病的有效和安全的方法；然而，对于特异性的存在（即，对感兴趣的EEG变量的调节具有特异性的临床效果）仍然存在很多疑问。这是一项定量审查方案，旨在确定是否有证据表明EEG-NFB在ID治疗中具有特异性。方法：我们将考虑所有已发表和未发表的随机、双盲（即受训者和评分者）、假/安慰剂对照（即取决于随机信号、来自不同人大脑的活动或来自受训者自己大脑的无关信号的反馈）试验，这些试验涉及至少有一种ID诊断的人类，不按语言、地点、种族、年龄，或性。将计算单个研究的影响大小，并在荟萃分析中进行组合。讨论：本方案概述了定量审查的研究方法，以评估EEG-NFB在治疗

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

NeuroRegulation Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health

CiteScore

2.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

19 weeks

期刊介绍： NeuroRegulation is a peer-reviewed journal providing an integrated, multidisciplinary perspective on clinically relevant research, treatment, reviews, and public policy for neuroregulation and neurotherapy. NeuroRegulation publishes important findings in these fields with a focus on electroencephalography (EEG), neurofeedback (EEG biofeedback), quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG), psychophysiology, biofeedback, heart rate variability, photobiomodulation, repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Simulation (rTMS) and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS); with a focus on treatment of psychiatric, mind-body, and neurological disorders. In addition to research findings and reviews, it is important to stress that publication of case reports is always useful in furthering the advancement of an intervention for both clinical and normative functioning. We strive for high quality and interesting empirical topics presented in a rigorous and scholarly manner. The journal draws from expertise inside and outside of the International Society for Neurofeedback & Research (ISNR) to deliver material which integrates the diverse aspects of the field, to include: *basic science *clinical aspects *treatment evaluation *philosophy *training and certification issues *technology and equipment