ReviewNursing open2021
A rapid evidence assessment of recent therapeutic touch research.
Review in Nursing open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06759337 (The Effect of Stress Ball Used During Intra Uterine Insemination on Pain, Anxiety, Comfort and Physiological Parameters), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
The Effect of Stress Ball Used During Intra Uterine Insemination on Pain, Anxiety, Comfort and Physiological Parameters: A Randomized Controlled Study
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Touch-based interventions, biofield therapies, and hypnosis for pain management: a scoping review of complementary approaches in physiotherapy.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of virtual reality (VR) glasses and therapeutic touch (TT) on pain, anxiety, and patient satisfaction during intrauterine insemination (IUI) compared to standard care: a single-blind, randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Trial
- The Effects of Therapeutic Touch on Test Anxiety among Nursing Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Florence Nightingale journal of nursing · 2026Article
- Music therapy in adult hospices: a national multicentre survey.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2025Article
- Unveiling heterogeneity and prognostic markers in ductal breast cancer through single-cell RNA-seq.Cancer cell international · 2024Article
- Biofield Therapies: Guidelines for Reporting Clinical Trials.Journal of integrative and complementary medicine · 2024Article
- Demographic and psychometric predictors associated with engagement in risk-associated alternative healthcare behaviours.PloS one · 2023Article
- A rapid evidence assessment of recent therapeutic touch research.Nursing open · 2021Review
- Role of psychomotricity in the management of body image disorders in schizophrenia: a case report.The Pan African medical journal · 2021Article
- Biofield Therapies: Guidelines for Reporting Clinical Trials.Global advances in integrative medicine and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo synthesize the most recent evidence investigating the effectiveness and safety of therapeutic touch as a complementary therapy in clinical health applications.
designA rapid evidence assessment (REA) approach was used to review recent TT research adopting PRISMA 2009 guidelines.
methodsCINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Google Scholar were screened between January 2009-March 2020 for studies exploring TT therapies as an intervention. The main outcome measures were for pain, anxiety, sleep, nausea and functional improvement.
resultsTwenty-one studies covering a range of clinical issues were identified, including 15 randomized-controlled trials, four quasi-experimental studies, one chart review study and one mixed methods study including 1,302 patients. Eighteen of the studies reported positive outcomes. Only four exhibited a low risk of bias. All others had serious methodological flaws, bias issues, were statistically underpowered and scored as low-quality studies. No high-quality evidence was found for any of the benefits claimed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.