<![CDATA[Neuromyths, misconceptions about brain function and learning, are widely endorsed by educators, yet their assumed impact on classroom practice, student outcomes, and educational resources has rarely been examined as a single causal chain. The objective of this review was to audit the empirical evidence at each link of a belief-practice-outcome-cost chain and to rate the certainty of that evidence. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020), Scopus, Google Scholar, and PubMed were searched for 2002-2026, and 581 records were screened to 42 included studies. Quality was appraised with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and certainty was rated with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The 42 studies yielded 36 belief-to-practice, seven practice-to-outcome, and three resource-or-cost link-instances. Belief-practice associations were heterogeneous: self-report inflated them, whereas observational designs frequently returned null effects. Certainty for practice-to-outcome harm was very low, and no study reported quantified cost data, as every resource-drain claim traced to a citation cascade rather than a primary economic source. These gaps reflect an absence of evidence, not evidence that harm is absent. The assumed chain therefore remains empirically untested and requires classroom observation, longitudinal designs, and economic evaluation.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
