MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Neurofeedback in the Working Memory of Children with Learning Disorders: An EEG Power-Spectrum Analysis

2021· preprint· en· W3183224351 on OpenAlexafffund
Benito Javier Martínez-Briones, Jorge Bosch‐Bayard, Rolando J. Biscay-Lirio, Lucero Albarrán-Cárdenas, Juan Silva‐Pereyra, Thalı́a Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoCanada First Research Excellence FundConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsNeurofeedbackElectroencephalographyWorking memoryAudiologyPsychologyResting state fMRITask (project management)CognitionSensorimotor rhythmBeta RhythmDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning disorders (LD) are diagnosed in children impaired in the academic skills of reading, writing and/or mathematics. Children with LD usually show a slower resting-state electroencephalogram (EEG), with EEG patterns corresponding to a neurodevelopmental lag. LD-children also show a consistent cognitive impairment in working memory (WM), including an abnormal task-related EEG with an overall slower EEG activity of more delta and theta power, and less gamma activity in posterior sites; task-related EEG patterns considered indices of an inefficient neural resource management. Neurofeedback (NFB) treatments aimed at normalizing the resting-state EEG of LD-children have shown improvements in cognitive-behavioral indices and diminished EEG abnormalities. Given the typical findings of a WM impairment in LD-children; we aimed to explore the effects of a NFB treatment in the WM of children with LD, by analyzing the WM-related EEG power-spectrum. We recruited 18 children with LD (8-10 years old). They performed a Sternberg-type WM-task synchronized with an EEG of 19 leads (10-20 system) twice in pre-post treatment conditions. They went through either 30 sessions of a NFB treatment (NFB-group, n= 10); or through 30 sessions of a placebo-sham treatment (Sham-group, n= 8). We analyzed the before-after treatment group differences for the behavioral performance and the WM-related power-spectrum. The NFB group showed faster response times in the WM-task post-treatment. They also showed an increased gamma power at posterior sites and a decreased beta power. We explain these findings in terms of NFB improving the maintenance of memory representations coupled with a reduction of anxiety.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit DesignFrench-language works237,207