ReviewWomen's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)2025
Clinical Hypnosis and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Hot Flashes: A Scoping Review.
Review in Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 2025. 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.
- Self-Administered Hypnosis vs Sham Hypnosis for Hot Flashes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- [Clinical update and comprehensive approach to menopausal symptoms for healthcare professionals].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hot flashes can be a prevalent issue for postmenopausal women, but traditional treatments such as hormone therapy can have adverse side effects. Recommended psychotherapies for managing hot flashes include cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and clinical hypnosis, but an in-depth review comparing the efficacy of both treatments is warranted. Objectives: The aim of the present scoping review was to assess the clinical significance and efficacy of symptom reduction of CBT and clinical hypnosis as treatments of hot flashes. Eligibility Criteria: Peer-reviewed primary studies were included in this review if they were published in English, used CBT or clinical hypnosis as their intervention, included hot flash outcomes, and sampled women aged 18 years or older. Sources of Evidence: A search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycINFO over December 2023 and January 2024. Charting Methods: Extracted information included eligible studies' authors, year of publication, country, title, design, participant population, intervention type, control group, primary and secondary outcomes, and key findings. Results: Of the 1847 studies identified by the literature search, 23 studies were included in this scoping review. While CBT was found to benefit bother and daily interference related to hot flashes, only studies investigating clinical hypnosis found significant reductions in the frequency and severity of hot flashes. Conclusions: Clinical hypnosis was found to outperform CBT by a large effect in treatment for hot flashes based on the current state of the literature. While both modalities treat psychological distress, only clinical hypnosis demonstrates the ability to reduce the severity and frequency of hot flashes, thus showing clinical significance. Limitations and future directions for research into CBT and clinical hypnosis for hot flashes are discussed.
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.