SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Tai Chi, brain activity and psychological outcomes: a systematic scoping review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Objectives: To identify and map studies examining Tai Chi in relation to at least one measure of brain activity or brain function and at least one psychological outcome; to characterize the populations, Tai Chi exposure features, neural modalities, and psychological domains represented; and to summarize whether included studies reported temporal or statistical links between neural and psychological findings. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched without date restrictions. Eligible studies reported original human data on Tai Chi and included at least one functional or neurophysiological brain outcome and at least one psychological or closely related cognitive-emotional outcome. Records were screened, full texts assessed, data extracted, and design-specific critical appraisal conducted. Findings were synthesized descriptively using evidence tables, narrative synthesis, and an evidence gap map. Results: Of 838 records identified, 460 unique records were screened after deduplication, 25 full texts were assessed, and 22 studies were included. The evidence base comprised randomized, non-randomized, and cross-sectional comparative studies. Older adults and university students were the most frequent populations, although several clinical groups were also represented. Electroencephalography and event-related potentials, functional magnetic resonance imaging, and functional near-infrared spectroscopy were the principal neural modalities. Across modalities, the most consistent pattern was the co-occurrence of favorable psychological or cognitive-emotional findings with Tai Chi-related neural change, although only a subset of studies formally tested eligible brain-behavior associations. In an added association-direction synthesis, statistically significant favorable associations were most evident in functional magnetic resonance imaging studies of depression, fatigue, and emotion-related outcomes. Favorable associations were also observed in electroencephalography/event-related-potential studies of anxiety and cognitive-emotional outcomes, and in one functional near-infrared spectroscopy study of emotional memory. However, many studies reported parallel neural and psychological findings without a direct eligible association test. Conclusion: This literature is growing but remains methodologically heterogeneous and unevenly distributed. It identifies important evidence clusters and gaps, but does not yet support specific mechanisms that support conclusions regarding effectiveness. The findings support cautious consideration of Tai Chi as a low-intensity adjunctive mind-body practice for psychological and cognitive-emotional outcomes, while indicating that neural measures should currently be used to improve trial design and hypotheses rather than to guide routine clinical decision-making. Systematic review registration: https://osf.io/fup6c/overview, Open Science Framework (ID: osf.io/fup6c; Date: 17-04-2026).
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.