A Methodological Critique of Closed-Loop EEG-BCI-VR Neurorehabilitation: Evaluating its Logical and Epistemic Validity

Closed-loop EEG-based brain-computer interface and virtual reality (VR) systems are widely described as a way to help people recover after stroke. This review asks whether the evidence actually supports that. The claim depends on a chain of steps: the system picks up a brain signal, the feedback is tied to that signal, patients get better, and the approach is ready for clinics. I went through each link and sorted the support behind it into direct evidence, indirect evidence, and plain assumption. I also questioned the pooled treatment estimates and the outcome measures they rely on. The main finding is a gap: there is little evidence for the combined EEG-BCI-VR approach itself. The review ends with hypotheses that could be shown wrong and a trial design that tests the parts one at a time. Version status: Preliminary working manuscript deposited to establish a public scholarly record of authorship and priority. This manuscript may undergo substantial revision and has not necessarily undergone peer review.