Confusion regarding operant conditioning of the EEG - Authors' reply

Increasing Value and Reducing Waste of Research on Neurofeedback Effects in Post-traumatic Stress Disorder: A State-of-the-Art-Review

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is often considered challenging to treat due to factors that contribute to its complexity. In the last decade, more attention has been paid to non-pharmacological or non-psychological therapies for PTSD, including neurofeedback (NFB). NFB is a promising non-invasive technique targeting specific brainwave patterns associated with psychiatric symptomatology. By learning to regulate brain activity in a closed-loop paradigm, individuals can improve their functionality while reducing symptom severity. However, owing to its lax regulation and heterogeneous legal status across different countries, the degree to which it has scientific support as a psychiatric treatment remains controversial. In this state-of-the-art review, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, Scopus, and MEDLINE and identified meta-analyses and systematic reviews exploring the efficacy of NFB for PTSD. We included seven systematic reviews, out of which three included meta-analyses (32 studies and 669 participants) that targeted NFB as an intervention while addressing a single condition-PTSD. We used the MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 and the criteria described by Cristea and Naudet (Behav Res Therapy 123:103479, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2019.103479 ) to identify sources of research waste and increasing value in biomedical research. The seven assessed reviews had an overall extremely poor quality score (5 critically low, one low, one moderate, and none high) and multiple sources of waste while opening opportunities for increasing value in the NFB literature. Our research shows that it remains unclear whether NFB training is significantly beneficial in treating PTSD. The quality of the investigated literature is low and maintains a persistent uncertainty over numerous points, which are highly important for deciding whether an intervention has clinical efficacy. Just as importantly, none of the reviews we appraised explored the statistical power, referred to open data of the included studies, or adjusted their pooled effect sizes for publication bias and risk of bias. Based on the obtained results, we identified some recurrent sources of waste (such as a lack of research decisions based on sound questions or using an appropriate methodology in a fully transparent, unbiased, and useable manner) and proposed some directions for increasing value (homogeneity and consensus) in designing and reporting research on NFB interventions in PTSD.

Is There Evidence for the Specificity of Closed-Loop Brain Training in the Treatment of Internalizing Disorders? A Systematic Review

Introduction

Internalizing disorders (IDs), e.g., major depressive disorder (MDD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are the most prevalent psychopathologies experienced worldwide. Current first-line therapies (i.e., pharmacotherapy and/or psychotherapy) offer high failure rates, limited accessibility, and substantial side-effects. Electroencephalography (EEG) guided closed-loop brain training, also known as EEG-neurofeedback (EEG-NFB), is believed to be a safe and effective alternative, however, there is much debate in the field regarding the existence of specificity [i.e., clinical effects specific to the modulation of the targeted EEG variable(s)]. This review was undertaken to determine if there is evidence for EEG-NFB specificity in the treatment of IDs.

Methods

We considered only randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trials. Outcomes of interest included self/parent/teacher reports and clinician ratings of ID-related symptomatology.

Results

Of the four reports (total participant number = 152) meeting our eligibility criteria, three had point estimates suggesting small to moderate effect sizes favoring genuine therapy over sham, however, due to small sample sizes, all 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were wide and spanned the null. The fourth trial had yet to post results as of the submission date of this review. The limited overall number of eligible reports (and participants), large degree of inter-trial heterogeneity, and restricted span of ID populations with published/posted outcome data (i.e., PTSD and OCD) precluded a quantitative synthesis.

Discussion

The current literature suggests that EEG-NFB may induce specific effects in the treatment of some forms of IDs, however, the evidence is very limited. Ultimately, more randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trials encompassing a wider array of ID populations are needed to determine the existence and, if present, degree of EEG-NFB specificity in the treatment of IDs.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero], identifier [CRD42020159702].

Neurofeedback Learning Is Skill Acquisition but Does Not Guarantee Treatment Benefit: Continuous-Time Analysis of Learning-Curves From a Clinical Trial for ADHD

Neurofeedback for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has long been studied as an alternative to medication, promising non-invasive treatment with minimal side-effects and sustained outcome. However, debate continues over the efficacy of neurofeedback, partly because existing evidence for efficacy is mixed and often non-specific, with unclear relationships between prognostic variables, patient performance when learning to self-regulate, and treatment outcomes. We report an extensive analysis on the understudied area of neurofeedback learning. Our data comes from a randomised controlled clinical trial in adults with ADHD (registered trial ISRCTN13915109; N = 23; 13:10 female:male; age 25–57). Patients were treated with either theta-beta ratio or sensorimotor-rhythm regimes for 40 one-hour sessions. We classify 11 learners vs 12 non-learners by the significance of random slopes in a linear mixed growth-curve model. We then analyse the predictors, outcomes, and processes of learners vs non-learners, using these groups as mutual controls. Significant predictive relationships were found in anxiety disorder (GAD), dissociative experience (DES), and behavioural inhibition (BIS) scores obtained during screening. Low DES, but high GAD and BIS, predicted positive learning. Patterns of behavioural outcomes from Test Of Variables of Attention, and symptoms from adult ADHD Self-Report Scale, suggested that learning itself is not required for positive outcomes. Finally, the learning process was analysed using structural-equations modelling with continuous-time data, estimating the short-term and sustained impact of each session on learning. A key finding is that our results support the conceptualisation of neurofeedback learning as skill acquisition, and not merely operant conditioning as originally proposed in the literature.

The Fallacy of Sham-Controlled Neurofeedback Trials: A Reply to Thibault and Colleagues (2018)

Background: Sham-controlled neurofeedback (NFB) trials consistently find no separation on ADHD outcome measures leading many to conclude that NFB's beneficial effects are due to placebo. Method: We deconstruct the NFB training methodology and findings of six sham-controlled trials that assessed for evidence of learning. Results: All six studies found no evidence NFB subjects learned to self-modulate the targeted electroencephalogram (EEG). Careful analyses revealed these studies' training methodologies were antithetical to the established science of operant conditioning thereby preventing subjects from learning to self-modulate. These findings are in marked contrast to NFB studies whose methodology mirror the best practices of operant conditioning. Conclusion: The premise that NFB's beneficial effects are due to placebo phenomenon is unproven as these studies compared two forms of false-feedback, not operant conditioning of the EEG. Because these studies are highly cited and considered the gold standard in scientific rigor, a reappraisal of the evidence is urgently needed.

Consensus on the reporting and experimental design of clinical and cognitive-behavioural neurofeedback studies (CRED-nf checklist)

Neurofeedback has begun to attract the attention and scrutiny of the scientific and medical mainstream. Here, neurofeedback researchers present a consensus-derived checklist that aims to improve the reporting and experimental design standards in the field.

Frontal brain activity and cognitive processing speed in multiple sclerosis: An exploration of EEG neurofeedback training

Background

Cognitive deficits including impaired information processing speed as assessed by the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) are common in multiple sclerosis (MS). Oscillatory markers of processing speed may be extracted from magnetoencephalographic (MEG) and electroencephalographic (EEG) resting-state recordings. In this context, an increased proportion of frontal slow-wave (theta, 4–8 Hz) to fast-wave (beta, 13–30 Hz) EEG activity was indicative of impaired SDMT performance. Such an increased theta/beta ratio may reflect oscillatory slowing associated with deficits in attention control. Therapeutic approaches that consider atypical oscillatory activity in MS remain sparse.

Objectives

In a cross-sectional design, we examined the relation between SDMT performance, the EEG theta/beta ratio and its components. We also explored longitudinally, whether EEG neurofeedback could be used to induce a putatively adaptive alteration in these EEG parameters, toward a pattern indicative of improved processing speed.

Methods

N = 58 MS patients (RRMS/SPMS/PPMS N: 18/35/3, 2 cases excluded) participated in a neuropsychological examination and a resting-state EEG recording. Subsequently, N = 10 patients received neurofeedback training for two weeks in a hospitalized setting. The purpose was to reduce the frontal theta/beta ratio through operant conditioning.

Results

In the cross-sectional examination, patients with slow SDMT speed displayed an increased theta/beta ratio, relative to those with normal speed. This involved increased frontal theta power, whereas beta power was equal across groups. The theta/beta ratio remained stable during neurofeedback across sessions of the two-week training period. In an exploratory secondary analysis, within sessions a reduction in the theta/beta ratio during active training blocks relative pre/post session resting-states was observed, driven by reduced theta power.

Conclusions

These findings provide support for utilizing frontal EEG theta activity as an inverse marker of processing speed in MS. Across sessions, there was no support for successful operant conditioning of the theta/beta ratio during the two-week training period. The observed state-specific shift within sessions, involving a transient reduction in theta activity, nevertheless may provide a rationale for a further investigation of neurofeedback as a treatment approach in MS.

•

Frontal EEG slow-wave/fast-wave activity (theta/beta ratio) was increased in MS patients with slow cognitive processing speed

•

The association involved a significant increase in theta activity, while beta did not vary with processing speed

•

The frontal theta/beta ratio remained stable across sessions during a neurofeedback intervention

•

Within sessions the theta/beta ratio was reduced during active training, relative to rest, driven by reduced theta activity

•

Frontal theta may be a marker of processing speed and a further exploration of neurofeedback training may be feasible in MS