Home › Research › Prevention trials
Tuning Up the Old Brain with New Tricks: Attention Training via Neurofeedback
Jiang Y, Abiri R, Zhao X.. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2017-03-13
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Neurofeedback (NF) is a form of biofeedback that uses real-time (RT) modulation of brain activity to enhance brain function and behavioral performance. Recent advances in Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) and cognitive training (CT) have provided new tools and evidence that NF improves cognitive functions, such as attention and working memory (WM), beyond what is provided by traditional CT. More published studies have demonstrated the efficacy of NF, particularly for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children. In contrast, there have been fewer studies done in older adults with or without cognitive impairment, with some notable exceptions. The focus of this review is to summarize current success in RT NF training of older brains aiming to match those of younger brains during attention/WM tasks. We also outline potential future advances in RT brainwave-based NF for improving attention training in older populations. The rapid growth in wireless recording of brain activity, machine learning classification and brain network analysis provides new tools for combating cognitive decline and brain aging in older adults. We optimistically conclude that NF, combined with new neuro-markers (event-related potentials and connectivity) and traditional features, promises to provide new hope for brain and CT in the growing older population.
Key findings
- More published studies have demonstrated the efficacy of NF, particularly for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children.
- We optimistically conclude that NF, combined with new neuro-markers (event-related potentials and connectivity) and traditional features, promises to provide new hope for brain and CT in the growing older population.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in aging neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28348527) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Jiang, Y., Abiri, R., & Zhao, X. (2017). Tuning Up the Old Brain with New Tricks: Attention Training via Neurofeedback. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00052
Vancouver
Jiang Y, Abiri R, Zhao X. Tuning Up the Old Brain with New Tricks: Attention Training via Neurofeedback. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. 2017. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2017.00052. PMID: 28348527.
BibTeX
@article{jiang2017-28348527,
author = {Jiang, Y. and Abiri, R. and Zhao, X.},
title = {{Tuning Up the Old Brain with New Tricks: Attention Training via Neurofeedback}},
journal = {Frontiers in aging neuroscience},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.3389/fnagi.2017.00052},
pmid = {28348527},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00052}
}
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “cognitive-function”
1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-function”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.