Back

Does wearable neurofeedback training improve memory aptitudes in healthy adults?--A systematic review and meta-analysis

HAGIHARA, M.; Ohkuma, R.; Fujimaki, T.; Tamaki, M.; Takemi, M.; Machizawa, M. G.

2025-11-05 neuroscience
10.1101/2025.11.03.685283 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Neurofeedback training (NFT) provides individuals with real-time feedback on their brain activity, enabling voluntary modulation. Interest in NFT for memory enhancement has surpassed the cumulative evidence in healthy adults, especially for modalities feasible outside of laboratory settings. To address this gap, this systematic review and meta-analysis focused on electroencephalography (EEG) and functional near- infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), both of which are portable and widely accessible. Randomized controlled trials published between January 1990 and September 2022 were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and APA PsycInfo. Of the 44 eligible studies, 24 reported sufficient data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Using a random-effects model, we found that NFT produced a small-to-moderate improvement in memory performance (standardized mean difference = 0.28; 95% confidence interval = 0.065-0.48; t(11.9) = 2.86; p = 0.014), with moderate heterogeneity. No publication bias was detected. Subgroup meta-analyses revealed significant effects in younger adults, for EEG-based protocols, and in tasks assessing verbal and short-term memory tasks. Meta-regression identified a positive association between daily session duration and effect size, with sessions longer than 30 minutes more likely to produce positive effects. As effects also varied by targeted brain regions and EEG frequency bands used for neurofeedback, protocol differences likely contributed to the observed variability in outcomes. Long- term follow-up is warranted to determine the persistence of NFT effects.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.