Stimulant medication and behaviour therapy are the most often applied and accepted treatments for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity-Disorder (ADHD). Here we explore where the non-pharmacological clinical intervention known as neurofeedback (NFB), fits on the continuum of empirically supported treatments, using standard protocols. In this quantitative review we utilized an updated and stricter version of the APA guidelines for rating ‘well-established’ treatments and focused on efficacy and effectiveness using effect-sizes (ES) and remission, with a focus on long-term effects. Efficacy and effectiveness are compared to medication and behaviour therapy using benchmark studies. Only recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as multi-centre randomized controlled trials (RCT’s) will be included. Two meta-analyses confirmed significant efficacy of standard neurofeedback protocols for parent and teacher rated symptoms with a medium effect size, and sustained effects after 6–12 months. Four multicenter RCT’s demonstrated significant superiority to semi-active control groups, with medium-large effect sizes end of treatment or follow-up and remission rates of 32–47%. Effectiveness in open-label studies was confirmed, no signs of publication bias were found and no significant neurofeedback-specific side effects have been reported. Standard neurofeedback protocols in the treatment of ADHD can be concluded to be a well-established treatment with medium to large effect sizes and 32–47% remission rates and sustained effects as assessed after 6–12 months.
Self-regulation is important for controlling one’s attention, mental state, behavior and emotion to enhance positive outcomes in life related to physical and mental health, school readiness, learning, academic achievement, relations, development of consciousness, and the ability to overcome of obstacles. ...
Abstract - Infra-Low Frequency Neurofeedback impinges on brain-based dysfunctions quite comprehensively, but the resulting improvements in self-regulatory competence cannot typically be captured both quantitatively and unambiguously. A measurable functional challenge is called for, and the Continuous Performance Test (CPT) offers such a challenge, one that both tests critical neuro-regulatory functions and has the benefit of broad acceptance within the neuropsychological community. A concise appraisal of results from a large database, one that extends over more than a decade and over thousands of clinical offices, is offered here as supportive testimony to the clinical effectiveness and practical utility of ILF neurofeedback in application to a wide variety of clinical conditions.
The test challenges the person under both high-demand and low-demand conditions. Under high-load conditions, the testee is more likely to make errors of commission, whereas under low-load conditions, the testee is more likely to make errors of omission. In addition to counting errors of omission and commission, the test determines the average reaction time, as well as the standard deviation of reaction time, the variability. ...
Cumulative distribution for impulsivity data on 12,100 neurofeedback clients who had infra-low frequency neurofeedback training. These data represent some quarter million sessions of Infra-Low Frequency neurofeedback. ...
A major divide within the field of neurofeedback is the basic question of whether we are aiming to improve function or to expunge dysfunction. This distinction was highlighted crisply many years ago when one of the early researchers, Barry Sterman, said that if he could not identify a deficit in the EEG he would be ethically compelled to send the client home. There would be nothing for him to do. ...
