SynthesisBMC psychology2026
Laughter intervention for stress reduction in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC psychology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of laughter intervention in alleviating stress among adults through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and explore sources of heterogeneity.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, 15 RCTs (1,344 participants) were identified via searches in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Data up to June 2025. Study selection, quality assessment (Cochrane Risk of Bias tool), and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 and Stata17.0, with stress outcomes pooled via random-effects models. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses assessed robustness and heterogeneity. Interventions included laughter yoga, simulated laughter sessions, and comedy-based therapies, delivered either online or in person, over durations ranging from 1 to 16 weeks.
resultsLaughter intervention significantly reduced stress (SMD = − 1.41, 95% CI: −2.04, − 0.78; p < 0.001), although high heterogeneity was observed (I² = 95.8%). Subgroup analyses confirmed consistent benefits across clinical patients, nurses, nursing students, and mothers of NICU children. Sensitivity analyses supported result stability (p < 0.001). The methodological quality of included studies was variable, with most showing some concerns regarding allocation concealment and blinding.
conclusionsBased on currently available RCT evidence, laughter intervention appears to be beneficial for reducing stress in diverse adult populations. However, the finding is tempered by high statistical heterogeneity and variable methodological quality across studies. Despite a large aggregate effect size, high heterogeneity limits the precision of the estimate. While promising, these results should be interpreted cautiously. Future research should prioritize multi-center designs, standardized outcome measures, and integration of objective biomarkers (e.g., cortisol) to strengthen evidence. Methodological improvements in RCT design and cultural adaptations are critical for clinical applicability.
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.