Bias control in bodywork therapies: a review of methodological issues

OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize the methodological challenges in clinical trials of bodywork or handson mind-body therapies such as Feldenkrais Method, Alexander Technique, Trager Work, Eutony, Body Awareness Therapy, Breath Therapy, and Rolfing, and to discuss ways these challenges can be addressed. DESIGN: Review and commentary. METHODS: Search of databases PubMed and EMBASE and screening of bibliographies. Published clinical studies were included if they used individual hands-on approaches and a focus on body awareness, and were not based on technical devices. RESULTS: Of the 53 studies identified, 20 fulfilled inclusion criteria. No studies blinded subject to the treatment being given, but 5 used an alternative treatment and blinded participants to differential investigator expectations of efficacy. No study used a credible placebo intervention. No studies reported measures of patient expectations. Patient expectations have been measured in studies of other modalities but not of hands-on mind-body therapies. Options are presented for minimizing investigator and therapist bias and bias from differential patient expectations, and for maintaining some control for nonspecific treatment effects. Practical issues with recruitment and attrition resulting from volunteer bias are addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous clinical trials of hands-on complementary and alternative therapy interventions are scarce, needed, and feasible. Difficulties with blinding, placebo, and recruitment can be systematically addressed by various methods that minimize the respective biases. The methods suggested here may enhance the rigor of further explanatory trials

Gratitude in the Time of the Coronavirus:A Thematic Analysis of the Three Good Things in Young Adults

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted the daily lives of college students, resulting in elevated levels of stress, anxiety, and isolation. Research suggests positive psychology interventions aimed at practicing gratitude, offer potential benefits in reducing these common mental health problems. However, there is a limited understanding of how or why these interventions work nor what function gratitude plays in the lives of young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, the purpose of the paper was to explore the sources and targets of gratitude of college students during the COVID-10 lockdown in Ireland. This study aimed analyse the content of the ‘Three Good Things’ intervention as reported by young adults during the COVID-19 lockdowns in Ireland. A total of 109 college students participated in a 7-day online ‘Three Good Things’ intervention, where they were prompted to reflect on and document three positive experiences each day. Participants were asked to elaborate on how these experiences made them feel and to highlight their role in facilitating these positive experiences. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the 2,200 submitted responses. The findings revealed three overarching themes relating to participants’ expressions of gratitude during the COVID-19 lockdown: (1) cultivating positive social interactions, (2) prioritizing meaningful self-care, and (3) fostering hope for a more normal life post-pandemic. By delving into the lived experiences of college students, this study sheds light on the elements central to their expressions of gratitude during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings underscore the importance of social connections, self-care practices, and hopeful prospects as sources of gratitude among students.</p

Positive Organisational Psychology 2.0: Embracing The Technological Revolution

Positive Organisational Psychology (POP) has experienced significant growth in the past two decades, contributing to our understanding of work-related well-being and performance. However, the discipline is now on the cusp of a new wave of research and innovation that may reshape its discourse. This paper introduces the concept of ‘Positive Organisational Psychology 2.0’ (POP 2.0) as an evidence-based, data-driven field that utilizes technological advancements and human-centred design to understand and enhance positive characteristics of individuals, organisations, and society for optimal psychological functioning, wellbeing, and performance. The paper begins with an overview of POP’s emergence, highlighting its key characteristics and exploring the factors behind its rapid growth and declining relevance. We then conceptualize POP 2.0, outline its defining features, and advocate for a broader scope, expanded focal audience, enhanced methodologies, and transformative role shifts for practitioners. We conclude by outlining opportunities, challenges and perspectives for the next wave of innovative research

A report on the translation into Kiswahili, and subsequent validation, of three positive psychology scales

Whilst positive psychology has grown as a strand of the discipline internationally, very little positive psychology research has been conducted in East Africa. It is likely that one reason for this is the scarcity of relevant validated Kiswahili-language psychometric scales. This paper reports the process and outcomes of translation into Kiswahili, refinement, and validation of three commonly-used scales from the positive psychology domain – the Gratitude Questionnaire, Satisfaction With Life Scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support – among students of the Universities of Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. Cronbach’s alpha values, mean inter-item correlations, and correlations with one another and with related measures, all yielded acceptable results. The final versions – K-GQ5, K-SWLS and K-MSPSS – appear valid and reliable, and suitable for use in research. We recommend larger scale investigation of these translations, the translation of further scales, and the development of positive psychology research in East Africa

Reactions to treatment debriefing among the participants of a placebo controlled trial

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of trial participants respond to placebos for a variety of conditions. Despite the common conduct of these trials and the strong emphasis placed on informed consent, very little is known about informing participants about their individual treatment allocation at trial closure. This study aims to address this gap in the literature by exploring treatment beliefs and reactions to feedback about treatment allocation in the participants of a placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial (RCT). METHODS: Survey of trial participants using a semi-structured questionnaire including close and open-ended questions administered as telephone interviews and postal questionnaires. Trial participants were enrolled in a double-blind placebo-controlled RCT evaluating the effectiveness of corticosteroid for heel pain (ISRCTN36539116). The trial had closed and participants remained blind to treatment allocation. We assessed treatment expectations, the percentage of participants who wanted to be informed about their treatment allocation, their ability to guess and reactions to debriefing. RESULTS: Forty-six (73%) contactable participants responded to our survey. Forty-two were eligible (four participants with bilateral disease were excluded as they had received both treatments). Most (79%) participants did not have any expectations prior to receiving treatment, but many 'hoped' that something would help. Reasons for not having high expectations included the experimental nature of their care and possibility that they may get a placebo. Participants were hopeful because their pain was so severe and because they trusted the staff and services. Most (83%) wanted to be informed about their treatment allocation and study results. Over half (55%) said they could not guess which treatment they had been randomized to, and many of those who attempted a guess were incorrect. Reactions to treatment debriefing were generally positive, including in placebo responders. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that most trial participants want to be informed about their treatment allocation and trial results. Further research is required to develop measure of hope and expectancy and to rigorously evaluate the effects of debriefing prospectively

Risk factors for repetition of self-harm: a systematic review of prospective hospital-based studies.

Background: Self-harm entails high costs to individuals and society in terms of suicide risk, morbidity and healthcare expenditure. Repetition of self-harm confers yet higher risk of suicide and risk assessment of self-harm patients forms a key component of the health care management of self-harm patients. To date, there has been no systematic review published which synthesises the extensive evidence on risk factors for repetition. Objective: This review is intended to identify risk factors for prospective repetition of self-harm after an index self-harm presentation, irrespective of suicidal intent. Data sources: PubMed, PsychInfo and Scirus were used to search for relevant publications. We included cohort studies which examining factors associated with prospective repetition among those presenting with self-harm to emergency departments. Journal articles, abstracts, letters and theses in any language published up to June 2012 were considered. Studies were quality-assessed and synthesised in narrative form. Results: A total of 129 studies, including 329,001 participants, met our inclusion criteria. Some factors were studied extensively and were found to have a consistent association with repetition. These included previous self-harm, personality disorder, hopelessness, history of psychiatric treatment, schizophrenia, alcohol abuse/dependence, drug abuse/dependence, and living alone. However, the sensitivity values of these measures varied greatly across studies. Psychological risk factors and protective factors have been relatively under-researched but show emerging associations with repetition. Composite risk scales tended to have high sensitivity but poor specificity. Conclusions: Many risk factors for repetition of self-harm match risk factors for initiation of self-harm, but the most consistent evidence for increased risk of repetition comes from long-standing psychosocial vulnerabilities, rather than characteristics of an index episode. The current review will enhance prediction of self-harm and assist in the efficient allocation of intervention resources