ReviewHeliyon2023
The effects of reflexology on symptoms in pregnancy: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Foot Reflexology on Pain and Comfort During Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effects of Reflexology on Anorexia and Sleep Quality in Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This review assessed the effects of reflexology on symptoms in pregnancy. Methods and analysis: PubMed, Embase, Springer, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and reference lists of previous systematic reviews were searched for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCT) from the inception date of each predefined database up to May 31st, 2023. Data were extracted, and methodological quality was evaluated by the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). The efficacy of treatment was assessed using pooled effect sizes (Hedges' g) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.4 manager, and publication bias was evaluated by Begg's test. Results: The included a total of 13 RCTs in this review, of eleven was high risk of bias and two were low, reported the effects of reflexology on low back and/or pelvic pain (LBPP), labor pain, duration of labor, anxiety, fatigue, sleep quality, constipation symptoms, and ankle and foot edema in pregnancy. The effect sizes (Hedges' g) for reflexology in labor pain, duration of labor, anxiety, fatigue, and sleep quality showed statistical significance, which the meta-analysis also confirmed except for fatigue and sleep quality due to insufficient studies. Conclusion: Reflexology is probably effective and safe for labor pain, duration of labor, and anxiety in pregnancy, while the evidences for reflexology in LBPP, fatigue, sleep quality, constipation symptoms, and ankle and foot edema during pregnancy were insufficient. Based on the low to high quality of included studies, strong supportive evidence is not yet available. Rigorous-design and large-scale clinical trials should be conducted to provide higher-quality, reliable evidence.
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.