The purpose of this study was to comparatively examine how educational neuroscience and brain-based education literature have developed in Western contexts (Europe and the United States) and East Asian contexts (China, Hong Kong, Korea, and Japan). This study employed a comparative narrative review guided by the PRISMA 2020 statement and PRISMA-S. Literature searches conducted up to February 21, 2026, included Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, CNKI, KCI/RISS, CiNii Research, and J-STAGE. The findings show that Western literature has primarily focused on establishing disciplinary identity, building translational bridges between education and neuroscience, addressing neuromyths, and strengthening methodological rigor. In contrast, East Asian studies more frequently emphasize teachers’ neuroscience literacy, professional development, contextual adaptation within school systems, and the practical application of neuroscience-informed approaches in classroom instruction. Recent studies increasingly use portable EEG, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and hyperscanning methods to investigate classroom interaction and teacher–student inter-brain synchrony, reflecting a shift toward research with greater ecological validity in real classroom settings. However, across both regions, robust causal evidence linking improvements in teachers’ knowledge or attitudes to measurable gains in students’ academic achievement or well-being remains limited. Overall, the review suggests that the key difference between Western and East Asian research traditions lies not in whether neuroscience should inform education, but in the types of questions that organize the field. Future research should incorporate cross-cultural comparative designs, regional-language literature, and frameworks linking teacher education with student outcomes.