Cargando…
How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review
Neurofeedback (NF) aims to alter neural activity by enhancing self-regulation skills. Over the past decade NF has received considerable attention as a potential intervention option for many somatic and mental conditions and ADHD in particular. However, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated ins...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36118975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.887504 |
_version_ | 1784790561265287168 |
---|---|
author | Hasslinger, John Meregalli, Micaela Bölte, Sven |
author_facet | Hasslinger, John Meregalli, Micaela Bölte, Sven |
author_sort | Hasslinger, John |
collection | PubMed |
description | Neurofeedback (NF) aims to alter neural activity by enhancing self-regulation skills. Over the past decade NF has received considerable attention as a potential intervention option for many somatic and mental conditions and ADHD in particular. However, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated insufficient superiority of NF compared to treatment as usual and sham conditions. It has been argued that the reason for limited NF effects may be attributable to participants' challenges to self-regulate the targeted neural activity. Still, there is support of NF efficacy when only considering so-called “standard protocols,” such as Slow Cortical Potential NF training (SCP-NF). This PROSPERO registered systematic review following PRISMA criteria searched literature databases for studies applying SCP-NF protocols. Our review focus concerned the operationalization of self-regulatory success, and protocol-details that could influence the evaluation of self-regulation. Such details included; electrode placement, number of trials, length per trial, proportions of training modalities, handling of artifacts and skill-transfer into daily-life. We identified a total of 63 eligible reports published in the year 2000 or later. SCP-NF protocol-details varied considerably on most variables, except for electrode placement. However, due to the increased availability of commercial systems, there was a trend to more uniform protocol-details. Although, token-systems are popular in SCP-NF for ADHD, only half reported a performance-based component. Also, transfer exercises have become a staple part of SCP-NF. Furthermore, multiple operationalizations of regulatory success were identified, limiting comparability between studies, and perhaps usefulness of so-called transfer-exercises, which purpose is to facilitate the transfer of the self-regulatory skills into every-day life. While studies utilizing SCP as Brain-Computer-Interface mainly focused on the acquisition of successful self-regulation, clinically oriented studies often neglected this. Congruently, rates of successful regulators in clinical studies were mostly low (<50%). The relation between SCP self-regulation and behavior, and how symptoms in different disorders are affected, is complex and not fully understood. Future studies need to report self-regulation based on standardized measures, in order to facilitate both comparability and understanding of the effects on symptoms. When applied as treatment, future SCP-NF studies also need to put greater emphasis on the acquisition of self-regulation (before evaluating symptom outcomes). SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260087, Identifier: CRD42021260087. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9478392 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94783922022-09-17 How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review Hasslinger, John Meregalli, Micaela Bölte, Sven Front Hum Neurosci Human Neuroscience Neurofeedback (NF) aims to alter neural activity by enhancing self-regulation skills. Over the past decade NF has received considerable attention as a potential intervention option for many somatic and mental conditions and ADHD in particular. However, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated insufficient superiority of NF compared to treatment as usual and sham conditions. It has been argued that the reason for limited NF effects may be attributable to participants' challenges to self-regulate the targeted neural activity. Still, there is support of NF efficacy when only considering so-called “standard protocols,” such as Slow Cortical Potential NF training (SCP-NF). This PROSPERO registered systematic review following PRISMA criteria searched literature databases for studies applying SCP-NF protocols. Our review focus concerned the operationalization of self-regulatory success, and protocol-details that could influence the evaluation of self-regulation. Such details included; electrode placement, number of trials, length per trial, proportions of training modalities, handling of artifacts and skill-transfer into daily-life. We identified a total of 63 eligible reports published in the year 2000 or later. SCP-NF protocol-details varied considerably on most variables, except for electrode placement. However, due to the increased availability of commercial systems, there was a trend to more uniform protocol-details. Although, token-systems are popular in SCP-NF for ADHD, only half reported a performance-based component. Also, transfer exercises have become a staple part of SCP-NF. Furthermore, multiple operationalizations of regulatory success were identified, limiting comparability between studies, and perhaps usefulness of so-called transfer-exercises, which purpose is to facilitate the transfer of the self-regulatory skills into every-day life. While studies utilizing SCP as Brain-Computer-Interface mainly focused on the acquisition of successful self-regulation, clinically oriented studies often neglected this. Congruently, rates of successful regulators in clinical studies were mostly low (<50%). The relation between SCP self-regulation and behavior, and how symptoms in different disorders are affected, is complex and not fully understood. Future studies need to report self-regulation based on standardized measures, in order to facilitate both comparability and understanding of the effects on symptoms. When applied as treatment, future SCP-NF studies also need to put greater emphasis on the acquisition of self-regulation (before evaluating symptom outcomes). SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260087, Identifier: CRD42021260087. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9478392/ /pubmed/36118975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.887504 Text en Copyright © 2022 Hasslinger, Meregalli and Bölte. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Human Neuroscience Hasslinger, John Meregalli, Micaela Bölte, Sven How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review |
title | How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review |
title_full | How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review |
title_short | How standardized are “standard protocols”? Variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: A systematic review |
title_sort | how standardized are “standard protocols”? variations in protocol and performance evaluation for slow cortical potential neurofeedback: a systematic review |
topic | Human Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36118975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.887504 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hasslingerjohn howstandardizedarestandardprotocolsvariationsinprotocolandperformanceevaluationforslowcorticalpotentialneurofeedbackasystematicreview AT meregallimicaela howstandardizedarestandardprotocolsvariationsinprotocolandperformanceevaluationforslowcorticalpotentialneurofeedbackasystematicreview AT boltesven howstandardizedarestandardprotocolsvariationsinprotocolandperformanceevaluationforslowcorticalpotentialneurofeedbackasystematicreview |