Neurofeedback as a Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review of Evidence for Practice

Willis, W. Grant; Weyandt, Lisa L.; Lubiner, Anna G.; Schubart, Chelsea D.

doi:10.1080/15377903.2011.590746

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the current QCA the outcome is related to effectiveness of a case (or intervention) for academic outcomes. It is through the use of set theoretic principles that QCA seeks to transcend the qualitative/quantitative divide (Thomas et al., ). QCA considers the necessity and sufficiency of conditions for an outcome, with ‘condition’ in this case denoting a particular intervention component or contextual factor.…”

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The method also allows for equifinality (Kahwati et al., ), meaning that QCA allows for multiple pathways to causality. Because QCA is focused on whether the presence or absence of conditions are important to trigger an outcome, a crisp‐set QCA analysis sees conditions coded as 1 for present and 0 for absent for each case (Thomas et al., ). In fuzzy‐set QCA, as will be used here, greater flexibility in categorisation is possible.…”

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the QCA analysis we followed the steps outlined by Thomas et al. () in their worked example of a QCA in a systematic review of interventions for public health and health promotion. Six stages of analysis are outlined: Building the data table Constructing a ‘truth table’ Checking the truth table Boolean minimisation, Consideration of the ‘logical remainders’ cases Interpretation. …”

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We examined pathways both to effectiveness and to least effectiveness for the QCA model (Thomas et al., ). Here we briefly outline the analytic steps.…”

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

School‐based interventions for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review with multiple synthesis methods

Moore

Russell

Matthews

et al. 2018

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non‐pharmacological interventions for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder are useful treatments, but it is unclear how effective school‐based interventions are for a range of outcomes and which features of interventions are most effective. This paper systematically reviews randomised controlled trial evidence of the effectiveness of interventions for children with ADHD in school settings. Three methods of synthesis were used to explore the effectiveness of interventions, whether certain types of interventions are more effective than others and which components of interventions lead to effective academic outcomes. Twenty‐eight studies (n = 1807) were included in the review. Eight types of interventions were evaluated and a range of different ADHD symptoms, difficulties and school outcomes were assessed across studies. Meta‐analyses demonstrated beneficial effects for interventions that combine multiple features (median effect size g = 0.37, interquartile range 0.32, range 0.09–1.13) and suggest some promise for daily report card interventions (median g = 0.62, IQR = 0.25, range 0.13–1.62). Meta‐regression analyses did not give a consistent message regarding which types of interventions were more effective than others. Finally, qualitative comparative analysis demonstrated that self‐regulation and one‐to‐one intervention delivery were important components of interventions that were effective for academic outcomes. These two components were not sufficient though; when they appeared with personalisation for individual recipients and delivery in the classroom, or when interventions did not aim to improve child relationships, interventions were effective. This review provides updated information about the effectiveness of non‐pharmacological interventions specific to school settings and gives tentative messages about important features of these interventions for academic outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We examined pathways both to effectiveness and to least effectiveness for the QCA model (Thomas et al., ). Here we briefly outline the analytic steps.…”

Section: Synthesis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

School‐based interventions for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review with multiple synthesis methods

Moore

Russell

Matthews

et al. 2018

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Willis et al conducted a systematic review of 14 empirical reports of neurofeedback treatment for children with ADHD and reported that neurofeedback is not well supported as an intervention for this disorder. 67 Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness of neurofeedback has been called into question. 68 Social skills training, summer treatment programmes and academic modifications have some support in the treatment of a range of ADHD symptoms and related impairments.…”

Section: Non-pharmacological Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-pharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) delivered in school settings: systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative research

Richardson

Moore

Gwernan‐Jones

et al. 2015

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAttention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by age-inappropriate levels of inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity. School can be particularly challenging for children with ADHD. Few reviews have considered non-pharmacological interventions in school settings.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions delivered in school settings for pupils with, or at risk of, ADHD and to explore the factors that may enhance, or limit, their delivery.Data sourcesTwenty electronic databases (including PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Education Resources Information Centre, The Cochrane Library and Education Research Complete) were searched from 1980 to February–August 2013. Three separate searches were conducted for four systematic reviews; they were supplemented with forward and backwards citation chasing, website searching, author recommendations and hand-searches of key journals.Review methodsThe systematic reviews focused on (1) the effectiveness of school-based interventions for children with or at risk of ADHD; (2) quantitative research that explores attitudes towards school-based non-pharmacological interventions for pupils with ADHD; (3) qualitative research investigating the attitudes and experiences of children, teachers, parents and others using ADHD interventions in school settings; and (4) qualitative research exploring the experience of ADHD in school among pupils, their parents and teachers more generally. Methods of synthesis included a random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression and narrative synthesis for review 1, narrative synthesis for review 2 and meta-ethnography and thematic analysis for reviews 3 and 4.ResultsFor review 1, 54 controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. For the 36 meta-analysed randomised controlled trials, beneficial effects (p < 0.05) were observed for several symptom and scholastic outcomes. Mean weighted effect sizes ranged from very small (d+ < 0.20) to large (d+ ≥ 0.80), but substantial heterogeneity in effect size estimates across studies was reported. Moderator analyses were not able to clarify which intervention features were linked with effectiveness. For review 2, 28 included studies revealed that educators’ attitudes towards interventions ranged in positivity. Most interventions were rated positively or neutrally across different studies. The only intervention that consistently recorded positive attitudes from educators was daily report cards. For review 3, 33 studies met the inclusion criteria. Key findings included tensions regarding the preferred format of interventions, particularly how structured interventions were and the extent to which they are tailored to the child with ADHD. There were mixed views about the impact of interventions, although it was clear that interventions both influence and are influenced by the relationships held by children with ADHD and participants’ attitudes towards school and ADHD. For review 4, 34 studies met the inclusion criteria. Key findings included the importance of causal attributions that teachers, parents and pupils made about ADHD symptoms, the decisions teachers made about treatment, the self-perceptions pupils developed about themselves, the role of the classroom environment and stigma in aggravating ADHD symptoms, and the significant barrier to treatment posed by the common presence of conflict in relationships between pupils–teachers, parents–teachers and pupils–peers in relation to ADHD. An overarching synthesis of the four reviews highlighted the importance of the context affecting interventions. It suggested that ADHD psychoeducation and relationship-building skills are potential implications for interventions.LimitationsThe breadth of both interventions and outcomes in the reviewed studies presented a challenge for categorisation, analysis and interpretation in reviews 1–3. Across reviews, relatively few studies were conducted in the UK, limiting the applicability of findings to UK education. In reviews 1 and 2, the poor methodological quality of some included studies was identified as a barrier to establishing effectiveness or comparing attitudes. In review 3 the descriptive analysis used by the majority of studies constrained theorising during synthesis. Studies in review 4 lacked detail regarding important issues like gender, pupil maturity and school level.ConclusionFindings suggest some beneficial effects of non-pharmacological interventions for ADHD used in school settings, but substantial heterogeneity in effect sizes was seen across studies. The qualitative reviews demonstrate the importance of the context in which interventions are used. Future work should consider more rigorous evaluation of interventions, as well as focus on what works, for whom and in which contexts. Gaps in current research present opportunities for the development and testing of standardised tools to describe interventions, agreement on gold-standard outcome measures assessing ADHD behaviour and testing a range of potential moderators alongside intervention trials.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001716.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

show abstract

Lesson Learnt from an EEG-Based Experiment with ADHD Children in Malaysia

Hisham

Rahman

2016

Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Users and Context Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neurofeedback as a Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review of Evidence for Practice

Cited by 11 publications

References 53 publications

School‐based interventions for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review with multiple synthesis methods

School‐based interventions for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review with multiple synthesis methods

Non-pharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) delivered in school settings: systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative research

Lesson Learnt from an EEG-Based Experiment with ADHD Children in Malaysia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About