SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2025
Emotional impact of using different sensory modalities for autobiographical activation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To the best of our knowledge, no previous work has synthesized the efficacy of MIPs based on the retrieval of AMs in relation to a wide range of both basic and complex emotions. This gap highlights the need to better understand how these interventions influence emotional states. Methodology: Accordingly, we conducted a systematic review of the literature and, when data were sufficient, a meta-analysis of pre-post changes in affective state. Our aim was to identify the most effective procedures for manipulating mood within empirical studies, and to develop a coherent framework to organize and interpret the efficacy of these types of MIPs, providing a foundation for future research. Results: The existing evidence is fragmented across heterogeneous protocols and lacks a unified quantitative synthesis. This fragmentation underscores the necessity of a systematic review and meta-analysis, which the present article undertakes to address. Discussion: Furthermore, we consider the growing interest in the field of "memory therapy", given its clinical benefits in helping individuals access past events and allowing them to relive experiences and their associated emotions. This area holds promise for enhancing emotional regulation and therapeutic outcomes. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42021249072, identifier: CRD42021249072.
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.