Abstract
NFB has a clear potential as a recognised treatment option for ADHD, but suffers from a lack of clarity about its efficacy, still unresolved after multiple controlled trials. Comparing learners and non-learners based on the evolution of patient-level indicators during the trial serves as a 'natural' control, and can help elucidate the mechanisms of NFB. We present a systematic review motivated by the need to establish the state of the art of patient learning during NFB treatment in current clinical literature. One particularly striking question we would like to answer here is whether existing NFB papers study learning variability, since only individual performance differences can give us information about mechanisms of learning. The results show that very few clinical trial reports have dealt with the heterogeneity of NFB learning, nor analysed whether NFB efficacy is dependent on NFB learning, even though NFB is believed to be a treatment based on learning to perform. In this systematic review we examine not only what has been reported, but also provide a critical analysis of possible flaws or gaps in existing studies, and discuss why no generalized conclusions about NFB efficacy have yet been made. Future research should focus on finding reliable ways of identifying the performers and studying participants' individual learning trajectories as it might enhance prognosis and the allocation of clinical resources.