↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Reiki for depression and anxiety

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
94 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
327 Mendeley
Title
Reiki for depression and anxiety
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006833.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janine Joyce, G Peter Herbison

Abstract

Anxiety and depression affect many people. Treatments do not have complete success and often require people to take drugs for long periods of time. Many people look for other treatments that may help. One of those is Reiki, a 2500 year old treatment described as a vibrational or subtle energy therapy, and is most commonly facilitated by light touch on or above the body. There have been reports of Reiki alleviating anxiety and depression, but no specific systematic review. To assess the effectiveness of Reiki for treating anxiety and depression in people aged 16 and over. Search of the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - all years), the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR - all years), EMBASE, (1974 to November 2014), MEDLINE (1950 to November 2014), PsycINFO (1967 to November 2014) and AMED (1985 to November 2014). Additional searches were carried out on the World Health Organization Trials Portal (ICTRP) together with ClinicalTrials.gov to identify any ongoing or unpublished studies. All searches were up to date as of 4 November 2014. Randomised trials in adults with anxiety or depression or both, with at least one arm treated with Reiki delivered by a trained Reiki practitioner. The two authors independently decided on inclusion/exclusion of studies and extracted data. A prior analysis plan had been specified but was not needed as the data were too sparse. We found three studies for inclusion in the review. One recruited males with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of non-metastatic prostate cancer who were not receiving chemotherapy and had elected to receive external-beam radiation therapy; the second study recruited community-living participants who were aged 55 years and older; the third study recruited university students.These studies included subgroups with anxiety and depression as defined by symptom scores and provided data separately for those subgroups. As this included only 25 people with anxiety and 17 with depression and 20 more with either anxiety or depression, but which was not specified, the results could only be reported narratively. They show no evidence that Reiki is either beneficial or harmful in this population. The risk of bias for the included studies was generally rated as unclear or high for most domains, which reduces the certainty of the evidence. There is insufficient evidence to say whether or not Reiki is useful for people over 16 years of age with anxiety or depression or both.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 94 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 327 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 325 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 18%
Student > Bachelor 54 17%
Researcher 37 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 27 8%
Other 59 18%
Unknown 64 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 86 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 59 18%
Psychology 44 13%
Social Sciences 12 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Other 44 13%
Unknown 73 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 145. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2021.
All research outputs
#161,507
of 17,638,294 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#310
of 11,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,468
of 233,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,638,294 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 233,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.