Measuring the Gamma Band Entropy Variance is a Novel Method to Compare the Efficacy of Neurofeedback in the Left Temporal Region and in The Right Temporal Region For Dyslexia: Pilot Study

Gunet Eroglu

doi:10.31067/acusaglik.1281312

EN

Measuring the Gamma Band Entropy Variance is a Novel Method to Compare the Efficacy of Neurofeedback in the Left Temporal Region and in The Right Temporal Region For Dyslexia: Pilot Study

Abstract

Background/aim: The smartphone application called Auto Train Brain aims to improve reading comprehension and speed for people with dyslexia through neurofeedback. Clinical trials have been conducted to examine the efficacy of neurofeedback on dyslexia. However, accurately measuring long-term outcomes with rapidly changing EEG data can be challenging without the use of psychometric tests. To overcome this issue, a novel measurement method was developed using the sample entropy variance calculated in the gamma band to compare different sessions. Materials and methods: 40 children with dyslexia aged 7 to 10 consisted of the experimental group that was randomly assigned and they used Auto Train Brain for six months. Results: Results of the study showed that after 100 sessions, the 14-channel neurofeedback with Auto Train Brain was more effective in increasing the gamma band entropy variance in the left temporal lobe (T7) compared to that of the right temporal lobe (T8). Conclusion: Using the measurement of gamma band entropy variance was identified as a suitable approach to assess the success of neurofeedback. Keywords: Neurofeedback, sample entropy, Auto Train Brain, learning disorders, dyslexia, EEG.

Keywords

References

1. American Psychiatric Association. Anxiety disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 2013:5 https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.dsm05
2. Siegel LS. Evidence that IQ scores are irrelevant to the definition and analysis of reading disability. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie. 1988; 42(2): 201.
3. Francks C, MacPhie IL, et al. The genetic basis of dyslexia. The Lancet Neurology. 2002; 1(8): 483-490.
4. Van Bergen E, De Jong, PF, Plakas, A, et al. Child and parental literacy levels within families with a history of dyslexia. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2012; 53(1): 28-36.
5. Kuhl U, Neef NE, Kraft I, et al. The emergence of dyslexia in the developing brain. Neuroimage. 2020 May 1;211:116633.
6. McDougall S, Hulme C, Ellis A, et al. Learning to read: The role of short-term memory and phonological skills. Journal of experimental child psychology. 1994 Aug 1;58(1):112-33.
7. Paulesu E, Frith U, Snowling M, et al. Is developmental dyslexia a disconnection syndrome? Evidence from PET scanning. Brain. 1996 Feb 1;119(1):143-57.
8. Sowell ER, Peterson BS, Thompson PM, et al. Mapping cortical change across the human life span. Nature neuroscience. 2003 Mar 1;6(3):309-15.

9. Schulte-Körne G, Bruder J. Clinical neurophysiology of visual and auditory processing in dyslexia: A review. Clinical neurophysiology. 2010 Nov 1;121(11):1794-809.
10. Klimesch W, Doppelmayr M, Yonelinas A, et al. Theta synchronization during episodic retrieval: neural correlates of conscious awareness. Cognitive Brain Research. 2001 Aug 1;12(1):33-8.
11. Rippon G, Brunswick N. Trait and state EEG indices of information processing in developmental dyslexia. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2000 Jun 1;36(3):251-65.
12. Arns M, Peters S, Breteler R, et al. Different brain activation patterns in dyslexic children: evidence from EEG power and coherence patterns for the double-deficit theory of dyslexia. Journal of integrative neuroscience. 2007 Mar;6(01):175-90.
13. Thornton KE, Carmody DP. Electroencephalogram biofeedback for reading disability and traumatic brain injury. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics. 2005 Jan 1;14(1):137-62.
14. Fraga González G, Smit DJ, Van der Molen MJ, et al. EEG resting state functional connectivity in adult dyslexics using phase lag index and graph analysis. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 2018 Aug 30;12:341.
15. Kraus N. Atypical brain oscillations: a biological basis for dyslexia?. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2012 Jan 1;16(1):12-3.
16. Ninaus M, Witte M, Kober SE, et al. Neurofeedback and serious games. InPsychology, pedagogy, and assessment in serious games 2014 (pp. 82-110). IGI Global.
17. In me. Management Association (Ed.), Gamification: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 83-112). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-8200-9.ch005
18. Niv S. Clinical efficacy and potential mechanisms of neurofeedback. Personality and Individual Differences. 2013 Apr 1;54(6):676-86.
19. Melnikov MY. The current evidence levels for biofeedback and neurofeedback interventions in treating depression: a narrative review. Neural Plasticity. 2021;2021(1):8878857.
20. Wing K. Effect of neurofeedback on motor recovery of a patient with brain injury: A case study and its implications for stroke rehabilitation. Topics in stroke rehabilitation. 2001 Oct 1;8(3):45-53.
21. Marins T, Rodrigues EC, Bortolini T, et al. Structural and functional connectivity changes in response to short-term neurofeedback training with motor imagery. Neuroimage. 2019 Jul 1;194:283-90.
22. Canolty RT, Edwards E, Dalal SS, et al. High gamma power is phase-locked to theta oscillations in human neocortex. science. 2006 Sep 15;313(5793):1626-8.
23. Lubar JF, Shouse MN. EEG and behavioral changes in a hyperkinetic child concurrent with training of the sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) A preliminary report. Biofeedback and Self-regulation. 1976 Sep;1(3):293-306.
24. Mayoral S, Pérez Álvarez F, Timoneda Gallart C. Brain Waves Reflect Cognition-Emotion State as a Diagnostic Tool for Intervention in Dysfunctional States: A Real-World Evidence. Journal of Intellectual Disability Diagnosis and Treatment, 2022, vol. 10, núm. 4, p. 154-166. 2022 Aug 31.
25. Terrasa JL, Barros-Loscertales A, Montoya P, et al. Self-regulation of SMR power led to an enhancement of functional connectivity of somatomotor cortices in fibromyalgia patients. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2020 Mar 19;14:522501.
26. Eroğlu G, Teber S, Ertürk K, et al. A mobile app that uses neurofeedback and multi-sensory learning methods improves reading abilities in dyslexia: A pilot study. Applied Neuropsychology: Child. 2022 Jul 3;11(3):518-28.
27. Wu Y, Feng G, Yan X, et al. Reduced pattern similarity in brain activation during orthographic processing in children with developmental dyslexia. Brain and Language. 2022 Dec 1;235:105201.
28. Nazari MA, Mosanezhad E, Hashemi T, et al. The effectiveness of neurofeedback training on EEG coherence and neuropsychological functions in children with reading disability. Clinical EEG and neuroscience. 2012 Oct;43(4):315-22.
29. Coben R, Wright EK, Decker SL, et al. The impact of coherence neurofeedback on reading delays in learning disabled children: A randomized controlled study. NeuroRegulation. 2015 Dec 8;2(4):168-.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Neurology and Neuromuscular Diseases

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Gunet Eroglu ^*
0000-0001-8382-8417
Türkiye

Early Pub Date

September 17, 2024

Publication Date

October 1, 2024

Submission Date

April 11, 2023

Acceptance Date

January 29, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 15 Number: 4

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31067/acusaglik.1281312

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA74MP83NA

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Eroglu G (October 1, 2024) Measuring the Gamma Band Entropy Variance is a Novel Method to Compare the Efficacy of Neurofeedback in the Left Temporal Region and in The Right Temporal Region For Dyslexia: Pilot Study. Acıbadem Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 15 4 342–348.

Öz

Measuring the Gamma Band Entropy Variance is a Novel Method to Compare the Efficacy of Neurofeedback in the Left Temporal Region and in The Right Temporal Region For Dyslexia: Pilot Study

Abstract

Keywords

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Early Pub Date

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite