Research › Practitioner Perspectives
Decision Making and Protocol Selection from the Perspective of the Brownback Mason and Associates Neurofeedback System (BMANS), Part 1
STS Instructor Authored by Thomas Brownback
Share
Article at a glance
Practitioner perspective. This article describes a clinician's own experience, cases or methods. It was not peer reviewed or controlled, so it can be subjective. Read it as practical insight, not as evidence that a treatment works.
- Area
- Practitioner Perspectives
- Authors
- Brownback TS
- Journal
- NeuroConnections (Spring 2011)
- Year
- 2011
- Protocol
- QEEG-guided individualized protocol selection; live z-score training (passive and active)
Key findings
- Combines a 300-item, multi-rater symptom checklist and psychoeducational testing with the QEEG
- Links 42 problem areas to the 10-20 sites most likely involved
- Builds each protocol from the most deviant z-scores instead of a fixed standard protocol
- Describes how passive and active live z-score training fit into the system; no outcome data are given
The first of two articles describing how one clinical group chooses neurofeedback protocols. The authors pair the QEEG with a 300-item symptom checklist (the CNC-1020), rated by the client and up to three others, and with psychoeducational testing. Each of 42 problem areas is linked to the 10-20 sites most likely involved. The six highest-rated problems that the checklist and the testing agree on point to where to look on the QEEG. From there, the site, eyes-open or eyes-closed condition, frequency band and training direction come from the most deviant z-scores, rather than from a standard protocol. The article describes the method and the authors' clinical experience; it does not report outcome data.
Read it in NeuroConnections, Spring 2011 (ISNR archive), p. 8 →