Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37859941›Full record

ArticleThe International journal of clinical and experimental hypnosis2023

Hypnotizability in the Clinic, Viewed from the Laboratory.

John F Kihlstrom

Open access · greenAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in The International journal of clinical and experimental hypnosis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

John F KihlstromUniversity of California, Berkeley, USA.
University of California System · US

Funding

PERSONALITY AND COGNITION IN HYPNOTIC PHENOMENAR01MH035856 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON · PI KIHLSTROM, JOHN F · 1985 to 1990
–
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH035856
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A recent international survey discovered that clinicians who use hypnosis in their practice rarely assess the hypnotizability of their patients or clients. This contrasts sharply with the practice in laboratory research. One reason offered for this discrepancy is that hypnotizability does not strongly predict clinical outcome. But a comparison of this relationship with similar correlations in other domains shows that this criticism is misleading-especially when the treatment capitalizes on the alterations in perception, memory, and voluntary control that characterize the domain of hypnosis. Routine assessment of hypnotizability improves clinical practice by enabling clinicians to select patients for whom hypnosis is appropriate; and it improves clinical research by providing important information about the mechanisms underlying hypnotic effects.

Indexed as

HypnosisHumans

Identifiers

PMID37859941
PMCPMC10584359
OpenAlexW4364381949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.