Challenging the Diagnostic Value of Theta/Beta Ratio: Insights From an EEG Subtyping Meta-Analytical Approach in ADHD.

The frequently reported high theta/beta ratio (TBR) in the electroencephalograms (EEGs) of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been suggested to include at least two distinct neurophysiological subgroups, a subgroup with high TBR and one with slow alpha peak frequency, overlapping the theta range. We combined three large ADHD cohorts recorded under standardized procedures and used a meta-analytical approach to leverage the large sample size (N = 417; age range: 6-18 years), classify these EEG subtypes and investigate their behavioral correlates to clarify their brain-behavior relationships. To control for the fact that slow alpha might contribute to theta power, three distinct EEG subgroups (non-slow-alpha TBR (NSAT) subgroup, slow alpha peak frequency (SAF) subgroup, not applicable (NA) subgroup) were determined, based on a halfway cut-off in age- and sex-normalized theta and alpha, informed by previous literature. For the meta-analysis, Cohen's d was calculated to assess the differences between EEG subgroups for baseline effects, using means and standard deviations of baseline inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity scores. Non-significant, small Grand Mean effect sizes (-0.212 < d < 0.218) were obtained when comparing baseline behavioral scores between the EEG subgroups. This study could not confirm any association of EEG subtype with behavioral traits. This confirms previous findings suggesting that TBR has no diagnostic value for ADHD. TBR could, however, serve as an aid to stratify patients between neurofeedback protocols based on baseline TBR. A free online tool was made available for clinicians to calculate age- and sex-corrected TBR decile scores (Brainmarker-IV) for stratification of neurofeedback protocols.

Heartbeat-Evoked Potential in Major Depressive Disorder: A Biomarker for Differential Treatment Prediction between Venlafaxine and rTMS?

INTRODUCTION: Currently, major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment plans are based on trial-and-error, and remission rates remain low. A strategy to replace trial-and-error and increase remission rates could be treatment stratification. We explored the heartbeat-evoked potential (HEP) as a biomarker for treatment stratification to either antidepressant medication or rTMS treatment. METHODS: Two datasets were analyzed: (1) the International Study to Predict Optimized Treatment in Depression (iSPOT-D; n = 1,008 MDD patients, randomized to escitalopram, sertraline, or venlafaxine, and n = 336 healthy controls) and (2) a multi-site, open-label rTMS study (n = 196). The primary outcome measure was remission. Cardiac field artifacts were removed from the baseline EEG using independent component analysis (ICA). The HEP-peak was detected in a bandwidth of 20 ms around 8 ms and 270 ms (N8, N270) after the R-peak of the electrocardiogram signal. Differences between remitters and non-remitters were statistically assessed by repeated-measures ANOVAs for electrodes Fp1, Cz, and Oz. RESULTS: In the venlafaxine subgroup, remitters showed a lower HEP around the N8 peak than non-remitters on electrode site Cz (p = 0.004; d = 0.497). The rTMS group showed a non-significant difference in the opposite direction (d = -0.051). Retrospective stratification to one of the treatments based on the HEP resulted in enhanced treatment outcome prediction for venlafaxine (+22.98%) and rTMS (+10.66%). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the HEP could be used as a stratification biomarker between venlafaxine and rTMS; however, future out-of-sample replication is warranted.

Rostral Anterior Cingulate Cortex Oscillatory Power Indexes Treatment-Resistance to Multiple Therapies in Major Depressive Disorder.

INTRODUCTION: High rostral anterior cingulate cortex (rACC) activity is proposed as a nonspecific prognostic marker for treatment response in major depressive disorder, independent of treatment modality. However, other studies report a negative association between baseline high rACC activation and treatment response. Interestingly, these contradictory findings were also found when focusing on oscillatory markers, specifically rACC-theta power. An explanation could be that rACC-theta activity dynamically changes according to number of previous treatment attempts and thus is mediated by level of treatment-resistance. METHODS: Primarily, we analyzed differences in rACC- and frontal-theta activity in large national cross-sectional samples representing various levels of treatment-resistance and resistance to multimodal treatments in depressed patients (psychotherapy [n = 175], antidepressant medication [AD; n = 106], repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [rTMS; n = 196], and electroconvulsive therapy [ECT; n = 41]), and the respective difference between remitters and non-remitters. For exploratory purposes, we also investigated other frequency bands (delta, alpha, beta, gamma). RESULTS: rACC-theta activity was higher (p < 0.001) in the more resistant rTMS and ECT patients relative to the less resistant psychotherapy and AD patients (psychotherapy-rTMS: d = 0.315; AD-rTMS: d = 0.320; psychotherapy-ECT: d = 1.031; AD-ECT: d = 1.034), with no difference between psychotherapy and AD patients. This association was even more pronounced after controlling for frontal-theta. Post hoc analyses also yielded effects for delta, beta, and gamma bands. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that by factoring in degree of treatment-resistance during interpretation of the rACC-theta biomarker, its usefulness in treatment selection and prognosis could potentially be improved substantially in future real-world practice. Future research should however also investigate specificity of the theta band.

Effects of SMR Neurofeedback on Cognitive Functions in an Adult Population with Sleep Problems: A Tele-neurofeedback Study.

A good night's sleep is vital for normal human cognitive performance. We earlier reported that a home-based tele-neurofeedback program effectively reduced sleep problems (Krepel et al. in Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-021-09525-z , 2021). The present article presents a follow-up on this earlier study and investigates improvements in cognitive functions after sensory-motor rhythm (SMR) neurofeedback. Thirty-seven participants reporting sleep problems received SMR neurofeedback. Cognitive measures were assessed pre- and post-treatment. Measurements included a continuous performance/working memory (CPT/WM) task, Stroop task, and Trailmaking A and B test (from the IntegNeuro cognitive test battery). For neurofeedback-Learners relative to non-Learners significantly improved CPT/WM response time (d = 0.50), omission errors (d = 0.67), and Stroop incongruent performance (d = 0.72) were found. A significant time effect for both groups were found for the Stroop, the Trailmaking test part B (d = 0.52), and the Stroop interference score (d = 0.55). No significant correlations between changes in sleep and changes in cognition (p > 0.05) were found for the sample. SMR neurofeedback specifically improved measures of attention (response time and omission errors in a CPT/WM test) and working memory (Stroop incongruent) for SMR Learners compared to non-Learners with medium effect sizes. Furthermore, overall improvements for the whole sample were found on measures of executive function and visual attention, possibly reflecting non-specific or practice effects. Future better powered randomized control trials are needed to investigate if cognitive improvements are a direct effect of SMR neurofeedback or mediated by sleep improvements.

For Which Children with ADHD is TBR Neurofeedback Effective? Comorbidity as a Moderator.

We examined psychiatric comorbidities moderation of a 2-site double-blind randomized clinical trial of theta/beta-ratio (TBR) neurofeedback (NF) for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Seven-to-ten-year-olds with ADHD received either NF (n = 84) or Control (n = 58) for 38 treatments. Outcome was change in parent-/teacher-rated inattention from baseline to end-of-treatment (acute effect), and 13-month-follow-up. Seventy percent had at least one comorbidity: oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) (50%), specific phobias (27%), generalized anxiety (23%), separation anxiety (16%). Comorbidities were grouped into anxiety alone (20%), ODD alone (23%), neither (30%), or both (27%). Comorbidity (p = 0.043) moderated acute effect; those with anxiety-alone responded better to Control than to TBR NF (d = - 0.79, CI - 1.55- - 0.04), and the other groups showed a slightly better response to TBR NF than to Control (d = 0.22 ~ 0.31, CI - 0.3-0.98). At 13-months, ODD-alone group responded better to NF than Control (d = 0.74, CI 0.05-1.43). TBR NF is not indicated for ADHD with comorbid anxiety but may benefit ADHD with ODD.Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT02251743, date of registration: 09/17/2014.

rTMS combined with CBT as a next step in antidepressant non-responders: a study protocol for a randomized comparison with current antidepressant treatment approaches.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is one of the most common psychiatric disorders, however, current treatment options are insufficiently effective for about 35% of patients, resulting in treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a form of non-invasive neuromodulation that is effective in treating TRD. Not much is known about the comparative efficacy of rTMS and other treatments and their timing within the treatment algorithm, making it difficult for the treating physician to establish when rTMS is best offered as a treatment option. This study aims to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of rTMS (in combination with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and continued antidepressant medication), compared to the next step in the treatment algorithm. This will be done in a sample of patients with treatment resistant non-psychotic unipolar depression. METHODS: In this pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial 132 patients with MDD are randomized to either rTMS or the next pharmacological step within the current treatment protocol (a switch to a tricyclic antidepressant or augmentation with lithium or a second-generation antipsychotic). Both groups also receive CBT. The trial consists of 8 weeks of unblinded treatment followed by follow-up of the cohort at four and 6 months. A subgroup of patients (n = 92) will have an extended follow-up at nine and 12 months to assess effect decay or retention. We expect that rTMS is more (cost-)effective than medication in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with TRD. We will also explore the effects of both treatments on symptoms associated with depression, e.g. anhedonia and rumination, as well as the effect of expectations regarding the treatments on its effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The present trial aims to inform clinical decision making about whether rTMS should be considered as a treatment option in patients with TRD. The results may improve treatment outcomes in patients with TRD and may facilitate adoption of rTMS in the treatment algorithm for depression and its implementation in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered within the Netherlands Trial Register (code: NL7628 , date: March 29th 2019).

Isolated epileptiform activity in children and adolescents: prevalence, relevance, and implications for treatment.

In the field of psychiatry diagnoses are primarily based on the report of symptoms from either the patient, parents, or both, and a psychiatrist's observations. A psychiatric diagnosis is currently the most widely used basis for medication selection and the brain is seldom investigated directly as a source of those symptoms. This study addresses the request from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria Project (RDoC) for scientific research into neurological abnormalities that can be linked to psychiatric symptoms for the purpose of predicting medication response. One such neurological abnormality that has been the focus of many studies over the last three decades is isolated epileptiform discharges (IEDs) in children and adolescents without seizures. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine prevalence rates of IEDs within diagnostic categories. We then compared the prevalence of IEDs in the selected literature to our IRB-approved data archive. Our study found a consistent high prevalence of IEDs specifically for ADHD (majority > 25%) and ASD (majority > 59%), and consistent low prevalence rates were found for Depression (3%). If children and adolescents have failed multiple medication attempts, and more than one-third of them have IEDs, then an EEG would be justified within the RDoC paradigm.

Evaluation of the URGOnight Tele-neurofeedback Device: An Open-label Feasibility Study with Follow-up.

SMR neurofeedback shows potential as a therapeutic tool for reducing sleep problems. It is hypothesized that SMR neurofeedback trains the reticulo-thalamocortical-cortical circuit involved in sleep-spindle generation. As such, strengthening this circuit is hypothesized to reduce sleep problems. The current study aims to investigate the effectiveness of a home-based device that uses SMR neurofeedback to help reduce sleep problems. Thirty-seven participants reporting sleep problems received the SMR neurofeedback-based program for 40 (n = 21) or 60 (n = 16) sessions. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Holland Sleep Disorders Questionnaire (HSDQ) were assessed at baseline, session 20, outtake, and follow-up (FU). Actigraphy measurements were taken at baseline, session 20, and outtake. Significant improvements were observed in PSQI Total (d = 0.78), PSQI Sleep Duration (d = 0.52), HSDQ Total (d = 0.80), and HSDQ Insomnia (d = 0.79). Sleep duration (based on PSQI) increased from 5.3 h at baseline to 5.8 after treatment and 6.0 h. at FU. No effects of number of sessions were found. Participants qualified as successful SMR-learners demonstrated a significantly larger gain in sleep duration (d = 0.86 pre-post; average gain = 1.0 h.) compared to non-learners. The home-based SMR tele-neurofeedback device shows the potential to effectively reduce sleep problems, with SMR-learners demonstrating significantly better improvement. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to further elucidate the specific effect of this device on sleep problems, this is the first home-based SMR neurofeedback device using dry electrodes demonstrating effectiveness and feasibility.

Can psychological features predict antidepressant response to rTMS? A Discovery-Replication approach.

BACKGROUND: Few studies focused on the relationship between psychological measures, major depressive disorder (MDD) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) response. This study investigated several psychological measures as potential predictors for rTMS treatment response. Additionally, this study employed two approaches to evaluate the robustness of our findings by implementing immediate replication and full-sample exploration with strict p-thresholding. METHODS: This study is an open-label, multi-site study with a total of 196 MDD patients. The sample was subdivided in a Discovery (60% of total sample, n = 119) and Replication sample (40% of total sample, n = 77). Patients were treated with right low frequency (1 Hz) or left high frequency (10 Hz) rTMS at the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Clinical variables [Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness Five-Factor Inventory, and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale, and BDI subscales] were obtained at baseline, post-treatment, and at follow-up. Predictors were analyzed in terms of statistical association, robustness (independent replication), as well as for their clinical relevance [positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV)]. RESULTS: Univariate analyses revealed that non-responders had higher baseline anhedonia scores. Anhedonia scores at baseline correlated negatively with total BDI percentage change over time. This finding was replicated. However, anhedonia scores showed to be marginally predictive of rTMS response, and neither PPV nor NPV reached the levels of clinical relevance. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that non-responders to rTMS treatment have higher baseline anhedonia scores. However, anhedonia was only marginally predictive of rTMS response. Since all other psychological measures did not show predictive value, it is concluded that psychological measures cannot be used as clinically relevant predictors to rTMS response in MDD.

Annual variation in attentional response after methylphenidate treatment.

Prevalence rates of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) differ with geographical areas varying in sunlight intensity. Sun- or daylight reaching the retina establishes entrainment of the circadian clock to daylight. Changes herein, hence, alterations in clock alignment, could be reflected indirectly in inattention via sleep duration. We here studied (1) annual variation in inattention at treatment initiation; (2) annual variation in response to ADHD treatment [methylphenidate (MPH)] by day of treatment initiation; and (3) dose dependence. We predicted least baseline inattention during a period of high sunlight intensity implying more room for improvement (i.e., a better treatment response) when sunlight intensity is low. These hypotheses were not confirmed. High-dose treated patients, however, had significantly better attention after treatment than low-dosed treated patients, only when treated in the period from winter to summer solstice. Change in solar irradiance (SI) during low-dosed treatment period was negatively related to attentional improvement. The above described findings were primarily found in inattention ratings and replicated in omission errors on a continuous performance task. Daylight and inattention have been proposed to be related via mediation of the circadian system. One mechanism of MPH may be to enhance sensitivity to the diurnal entrainment to sunlight and the question can be raised whether appropriate lighting could potentiate the effects of stimulants.

Neurofeedback and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity-Disorder (ADHD) in Children: Rating the Evidence and Proposed Guidelines.

Stimulant medication and behaviour therapy are the most often applied and accepted treatments for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity-Disorder (ADHD). Here we explore where the non-pharmacological clinical intervention known as neurofeedback (NFB), fits on the continuum of empirically supported treatments, using standard protocols. In this quantitative review we utilized an updated and stricter version of the APA guidelines for rating 'well-established' treatments and focused on efficacy and effectiveness using effect-sizes (ES) and remission, with a focus on long-term effects. Efficacy and effectiveness are compared to medication and behaviour therapy using benchmark studies. Only recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as multi-centre randomized controlled trials (RCT's) will be included. Two meta-analyses confirmed significant efficacy of standard neurofeedback protocols for parent and teacher rated symptoms with a medium effect size, and sustained effects after 6-12 months. Four multicenter RCT's demonstrated significant superiority to semi-active control groups, with medium-large effect sizes end of treatment or follow-up and remission rates of 32-47%. Effectiveness in open-label studies was confirmed, no signs of publication bias were found and no significant neurofeedback-specific side effects have been reported. Standard neurofeedback protocols in the treatment of ADHD can be concluded to be a well-established treatment with medium to large effect sizes and 32-47% remission rates and sustained effects as assessed after 6-12 months.

Different Spectral Analysis Methods for the Theta/Beta Ratio Calculate Different Ratios But Do Not Distinguish ADHD from Controls.

There has been ongoing research on the ratio of theta to beta power (Theta/Beta Ratio, TBR) as an EEG-based test in the diagnosis of ADHD. Earlier studies reported significant TBR differences between patients with ADHD and controls. However, a recent meta-analysis revealed a marked decline of effect size for the difference in TBR between ADHD and controls for studies published in the past decade. Here, we test if differences in EEG processing explain the heterogeneity of findings. We analyzed EEG data from two multi-center clinical studies. Five different EEG signal processing algorithms were applied to calculate the TBR. Differences between resulting TBRs were subsequently assessed for clinical usability in the iSPOT-A dataset. Although there were significant differences in the resulting TBRs, none distinguished between children with and without ADHD, and no consistent associations with ADHD symptoms arose. Different methods for EEG signal processing result in significantly different TBRs. However, none of the methods significantly distinguished between ADHD and healthy controls in our sample. The secular effect size decline for the TBR is most likely explained by factors other than differences in EEG signal processing, e.g. fewer hours of sleep in participants and differences in inclusion criteria for healthy controls.

Neurofeedback as a Treatment Intervention in ADHD: Current Evidence and Practice.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Current traditional treatments for ADHD present serious limitations in terms of long-term maintenance of symptom remission and side effects. Here, we provide an overview of the rationale and scientific evidence of the efficacy of neurofeedback in regulating the brain functions in ADHD. We also review the institutional and professional regulation of clinical neurofeedback implementations. RECENT FINDINGS: Based on meta-analyses and (large multicenter) randomized controlled trials, three standard neurofeedback training protocols, namely theta/beta (TBR), sensori-motor rhythm (SMR), and slow cortical potential (SCP), turn out to be efficacious and specific. However, the practical implementation of neurofeedback as a clinical treatment is currently not regulated. We conclude that neurofeedback based on standard protocols in ADHD should be considered as a viable treatment alternative and suggest that further research is needed to understand how specific neurofeedback protocols work. Eventually, we emphasize the need for standard neurofeedback training for practitioners and binding standards for use in clinical practice.

Sustained effects of neurofeedback in ADHD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Neurofeedback (NF) has gained increasing interest in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Given learning principles underlie NF, lasting clinical treatment effects may be expected. This systematic review and meta-analysis addresses the sustainability of neurofeedback and control treatment effects by considering randomized controlled studies that conducted follow-up (FU; 2-12 months) assessments among children with ADHD. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched through November 2017. Within-group and between-group standardized mean differences (SMD) of parent behavior ratings were calculated and analyzed. Ten studies met inclusion criteria (NF: ten studies, N = 256; control: nine studies, N = 250). Within-group NF effects on inattention were of medium effect size (ES) (SMD = 0.64) at post-treatment and increased to a large ES (SMD = 0.80) at FU. Regarding hyperactivity/impulsivity, NF ES were medium at post-treatment (SMD = 0.50) and FU (SMD = 0.61). Non-active control conditions yielded a small significant ES on inattention at post-treatment (SMD = 0.28) but no significant ES at FU. Active treatments (mainly methylphenidate), had large ES for inattention (post: SMD = 1.08; FU: SMD = 1.06) and medium ES for hyperactivity/impulsivity (post: SMD = 0.74; FU: SMD = 0.67). Between-group analyses also revealed an advantage of NF over non-active controls [inattention (post: SMD = 0.38; FU: SMD = 0.57); hyperactivity-impulsivity (post: SMD = 0.25; FU: SMD = 0.39)], and favored active controls for inattention only at pre-post (SMD = - 0.44). Compared to non-active control treatments, NF appears to have more durable treatment effects, for at least 6 months following treatment. More studies are needed for a properly powered comparison of follow-up effects between NF and active treatments and to further control for non-specific effects.

19 Channel Z-Score and LORETA Neurofeedback: Does the Evidence Support the Hype?

Neurofeedback is a well-investigated treatment for ADHD and epilepsy, especially when restricted to standard protocols such as theta/beta, slow cortical potentials and sensori-motor rhythm neurofeedback. Advances in any field are welcome and other techniques are being pursued. Manufacturers and clinicians are marketing 'superior' neurofeedback approaches including 19 channel Z-score neurofeedback (ZNFB) and 3-D LORETA neurofeedback (with or without Z-scores; LNFB). We conducted a review of the empirical literature to determine if such claims were warranted. This review included the above search terms in Pubmed, Google scholar and any references that met our criteria from the ZNFB publication list and was restricted to group based studies examining improvement in a clinical population that underwent peer review (book chapters, magazine articles or conference presentations are not included since these are not peer reviewed). Fifteen relevant studies emerged with only six meeting our criterion. Based on review of these studies it was concluded that empirical validation of these approaches is sorely lacking. There is no empirical data that supports the notion that 19-channel z-score neurofeedback is effective or superior. The quality of studies for LNFB was better compared to ZNFB and some suggestion for efficacy was demonstrated for ADHD and Tinnitus distress. However, these findings need to be replicated, extended to other populations and have yet to show any "superiority." Our conclusions continue to emphasize the pervasive lack of evidence supporting these approaches to neurofeedback and the implications of this are discussed.

No Effects of Successful Bidirectional SMR Feedback Training on Objective and Subjective Sleep in Healthy Subjects.

There is a growing interest in the application of psychophysiological signals in more applied settings. Unidirectional sensory motor rhythm-training (SMR) has demonstrated consistent effects on sleep. In this study the main aim was to analyze to what extent participants could gain voluntary control over sleep-related parameters and secondarily to assess possible influences of this training on sleep metrics. Bidirectional training of SMR as well as heart rate variability (HRV) was used to assess the feasibility of training these parameters as possible brain computer interfaces (BCI) signals, and assess effects normally associated with unidirectional SMR training such as the influence on objective and subjective sleep parameters. Participants (n = 26) received between 11 and 21 training sessions during 7 weeks in which they received feedback on their personalized threshold for either SMR or HRV activity, for both up- and down regulation. During a pre- and post-test a sleep log was kept and participants used a wrist actigraph. Participants were asked to take an afternoon nap on the first day at the testing facility. During napping, sleep spindles were assessed as well as self-reported sleep measures of the nap. Although the training demonstrated successful learning to increase and decrease SMR and HRV activity, no effects were found of bidirectional training on sleep spindles, actigraphy, sleep diaries, and self-reported sleep quality. As such it is concluded that bidirectional SMR and HRV training can be safely used as a BCI and participants were able to improve their control over physiological signals with bidirectional training, whereas the application of bidirectional SMR and HRV training did not lead to significant changes of sleep quality in this healthy population.

Editorial Perspective: How should child psychologists and psychiatrists interpret FDA device approval? Caveat emptor.

Recently several new tests have received US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) marketing approval as aids in the diagnostic process for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), including the Neuropsychiatric electroencephalogram (EEG)-Based ADHD Assessment Aid (NEBA) Health test. The NEBA test relies upon an EEG-based measure, called the theta to beta ratio (TBR). Although this measure has yielded large differences between ADHD and non-ADHD groups in studies prior to 2009, recent studies and a meta-analysis could not replicate these findings. In this article, we have used the NEBA device as an exemplar for a discussion that distinguishes between FDA de novo marketing approval for a device and any claims that that device is empirically supported, scientifically validated with replicated findings. It is understood that the aims of each differ; however, for many, including the lay public as well as some mental health professionals, these terms may be confused and treated as though they are synonymous. With regard to the TBR measure, there is no reliable association or replication for its clinical usage in the ADHD diagnostic process. The recommendation for potential consumers of the NEBA Health test (as well as perhaps for other existing FDA-approved diagnostic tests) is caveat emptor (let the buyer beware!).