Measuring therapy success through narrow statistical lenses misses the full picture of effective treatment.

The decision to remove neurofeedback funding reveals a dangerous bias in how we evaluate therapy effectiveness. While traditional metrics might struggle to capture neurofeedback’s impact, families consistently report transformative changes in daily functioning, emotional regulation, and quality of life that no spreadsheet can adequately measure.

Standard evaluation methods often fail to capture real-world treatment success.

When we prioritise certain types of evidence while dismissing the lived experience of families and practitioners, we risk eliminating treatments that create meaningful change in people’s lives. The metrics we choose to value can blind us to the real impact of effective therapies.

Real success stories deserve equal weight in funding decisions.

The consistent reports of breakthrough progress through neurofeedback can’t be dismissed simply because they don’t fit conventional evaluation models. When hundreds of families report life-changing improvements, their experiences constitute valid evidence of treatment effectiveness.

We must expand our understanding of what constitutes meaningful evidence.

Reinstating neurofeedback funding requires acknowledging that treatment success can’t always be captured in traditional statistical measures. The real-world impact reported by families and practitioners must carry weight in funding decisions.