Cited by 75Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

The effectiveness of using neurofeedback in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder: a systematic review

Panisch, Lisa S., Hai, Audrey Hang·2020·Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Abstract

Neurofeedback is an innovative treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that is readily accessible to mental health therapists. As a widespread mental health concern with potentially devastating long-term consequences on psychosocial functioning, PTSD can also adversely impact biophysiological processes, particularly those related to the brain. Neurofeedback has shown promise in alleviating overall PTSD symptoms, including these underlying neurobiological consequences. Successful results have been found among clients with PTSD who have not been responsive to prior treatment modalities. While a strong base of clinical anecdotes and case studies supports its success in treating PTSD, intervention studies on neurofeedback have been critiqued for lack of rigor and poor methodological design. A current systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of neurofeedback in treating PTSD was conducted. Unlike prior reviews which emphasized neurobiological changes, this study was written for the mental health therapist and focused solely on behavioral outcomes. Ten studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Neurofeedback demonstrated salubrious results in at least one outcome measure for the majority of participants across all studies. Interpretations, however, are limited by wide discrepancies in sample sizes, study designs, outcome measures, and the extent of reported results. Future research in this area would benefit from prioritizing randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes and longitudinal follow-up results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1524838018781103

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Panisch, L. S., & Hai, A. H.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Panisch, Lisa S.
Venue
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
Published
2018-06-11
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
541-550
ISSN
  • 1524-8380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8324
OpenAlex
W2807995556
Cited by
75
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trauma Violence & Abuse (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
neurofeedback, post-traumatic stress disorder, treatment effectiveness, behavioral effects, psychotherapy, randomized controlled trials, methodological quality
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Treatment Outcome, Neurofeedback

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review