BackgroundFrontal alpha asymmetry (FAA) has frequently been reported as potential discriminator between depressed and healthy individuals, although contradicting results have been published. The aim of the current study was to provide an up to date meta-analysis on the diagnostic value of FAA in major depressive disorder (MDD) and to further investigate discrepancies in a large cross-sectional dataset.MethodsSCOPUS database was searched through February 2017. Studies were included if the article reported on both MDD and controls, provided an FAA measure involving EEG electrodes F3/F4, and provided data regarding potential covariates. Hedges' d was calculated from FAA means and standard deviations (SDs). Potential covariates, such as age and gender, were explored. Post hoc analysis was performed to elucidate interindividual differences that could explain interstudy discrepancies.Results16 studies were included (MDD: n = 1883, controls: n = 2161). After resolving significant heterogeneity by excluding studies, a non-significant Grand Mean effect size (ES) was obtained (d = − 0.007;CI = [− 0.090]–[0.075]). Crosssectional analyses showed a significant three-way interaction for Gender × Age × Depression severity in the depressed group, which was prospectively replicated in an independent sample.ConclusionsThe main result was a non-significant, negligible ES, demonstrating limited diagnostic value of FAA in MDD. The high degree of heterogeneity across studies indicates covariate influence, as was confirmed by crosssectional analyses, suggesting future studies should address this Gender × Age × Depression severity interaction. Upcoming studies should focus more on prognostic and research domain usages of FAA rather than a pure diagnostic tool.
Neurofeedback (NF) has gained increasing interest in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Given learning principles underlie NF, lasting clinical treatment effects may be expected. This systematic review and meta-analysis addresses the sustainability of neurofeedback and control treatment effects by considering randomized controlled studies that conducted follow-up (FU; 2-12 months) assessments among children with ADHD. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched through November 2017. Within-group and between-group standardized mean differences (SMD) of parent behavior ratings were calculated and analyzed. Ten studies met inclusion criteria (NF: ten studies, N = 256; control: nine studies, N = 250). Within-group NF effects on inattention were of medium effect size (ES) (SMD = 0.64) at post-treatment and increased to a large ES (SMD = 0.80) at FU. Regarding hyperactivity/impulsivity, NF ES were medium at post-treatment (SMD = 0.50) and FU (SMD = 0.61). Non-active control conditions yielded a small significant ES on inattention at posttreatment (SMD = 0.28) but no significant ES at FU. Active treatments (mainly methylphenidate), had large ES for inattention (post: SMD = 1.08; FU: SMD = 1.06) and medium ES for hyperactivity/impulsivity (post: SMD = 0.74; FU: SMD = 0.67). Between-group analyses also revealed an advantage of NF over non-active controls [inattention (post: SMD = 0.38; FU: SMD = 0.57); hyperactivity-impulsivity (post: SMD = 0.25; FU: SMD = 0.39)], and favored active controls for inattention only at pre-post (SMD = − 0.44). Compared to non-active control treatments, NF appears to have more durable treatment effects, for at least 6 months following treatment. More studies are needed for a properly powered comparison of follow-up effects between NF and active treatments and to further control for non-specific effects.
Overall, the existing literature and this study fail to support any benefit of neurofeedback on neurocognitive functioning in ADHD, possibly due to small sample sizes and other study limitations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.