SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Do expressive writing interventions have positive effects on Koreans?: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of expressive writing on the sexual self-concept in men with multiple sclerosis: a randomized clinical controlled trial.BMC neurology · 2025Trial
- Article
- Expressive Writing and Self-Care in Palliative Care Professionals: A Qualitative Longitudinal Study.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2026Article
- Bidirectional Longitudinal Associations Among Health-Related Quality of Life, Emotional Expressivity, and Readiness to Return to Work in Patients with Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Receiving Intravesical Therapy: A Three-Wave Cohort Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Expressive Writing (EW) is an intervention that focuses on individuals' writing down their thoughts and feelings about trauma or stressful events. Meta-analyses on EW studies have confirmed that EW has a positive effect. However, the heterogeneity of studies is high, so many studies have investigated boundary conditions and moderators. One of these moderators is the cultural difference in emotional suppression. Since EW focuses on the expression of suppressed thoughts and emotions, its effect might be slightly different for people in Asian cultures who show a high tendency to suppress their emotions. This study attempted to confirm the effect size of the EW interventions in Korea and examine whether these studies have different effect size from those based on Western cultures. Method: A total of 29 studies published in Korea until 2021 were analyzed. The effect size was calculated using the "dmetar," "meta," and "metafor" packages of the statistical program R 4.0.4. Results: The results were as follows. First, the effect size of EW intervention was 0.16, and we found that studies in the Korean context showed no significant difference from studies based on western meta-analysis. Second, the moderating variables that influenced the EW intervention were the writing type, the number of sessions, the time per session, and the measurement time. Discussion: The results of this study suggest that EW interventions benefit Koreans. And it is at least harmless and has a positive effect considering the efficiency and conciseness of interventions. Furthermore, the finding shows that EW interventions can be helpful even in the general population without apparent psychological problems. By considering moderators, we could structure more effective form of EW interventions for Koreans.
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.