ReviewJournal of religion and health2017
Research on Intercessory Prayer: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations.
Review in Journal of religion and health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Dutch Study of Remarkable Recoveries After Prayer: How to Deal with Uncertainties of Explanation.Journal of religion and health · 2023Article
- Typologies and Meanings of Prayer Among Patients.Journal of religion and health · 2022Article
- Intercessory Rote Prayer, Life Longevity and the Mortality of Roman Catholic Bishops: An Exploratory Study.Journal of religion and health · 2021Observational
- Exploration of Fatalism and Religiosity by Gender and Varying Levels of Engagement Among Mexican-American Adults of a Type 2 Diabetes Management Program.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Belief in the healing power of prayer is found in various religious traditions. Spiritually grounded clinical interventions, such as intercessory prayer (IP), need to be understood in a broader sense. This essay features the IP trials, observing the controversial relationship between inconsistent results and allegedly inadequate methods and theoretical hypothesis. A survey of the literature was conducted including publications indexed until September 2013, focusing on the trials developed in the field and on the critics about the methodological design. Recent meta-analyses and multicenter studies found inconclusive results in the investigation of IP. Clinical trials on IP present some methodological difficulties: The intervention is not fully controlled; the primary outcome is not properly defined; and the theoretical models seem inconsistent. The "non-local consciousness" model may be appropriate for studies of IP. Directions for future research: greater emphasis on the evaluation of the effectiveness of this intervention in animal models; selection of subjects and healers who have previous connection; considering the hypothesis of non-local consciousness in the study design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26743876What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.