The evaluation of religious and spirituality-based therapy compared to standard treatment in mental health care: A multi-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Psychotherapies are increasingly incorporating spiritual and religious systems of belief and practice, which aligns with recent developments toward person-centered treatments. The main objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of a religion and spiritually-based (R/S) therapy to non-R/S treatments. METHOD: A multi-level meta-analysis was conducted to compare randomized controlled studies of the efficacy between R/S-based and regular treatments in mental health care setting. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis, psychotherapeutic treatment, and explicitly religion/spirituality therapy. Outcome was assessed for symptoms and for functioning separately, and combined. We also examined several moderators, such as type of comparison, outcome domain, and diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall effect sizes obtained from 23 studies and 27 comparison groups indicated that a R/S treatment is moderately more efficacious compared to regular treatments at posttreatment (g = .52, p < .01) and at follow-up (g = .72, p < .01) (only available for symptoms). Results were similar for symptoms (g = .44, p < .01) and functioning (g = .62, p < .01). CONCLUSION: In patients with a strong religious and spiritual affiliation, treatments with a focus on religious and spiritual issues are more efficacious than non-R/S-based therapy. Limitations as well as future directions are discussed.

Can you be cured if the doctor disagrees? A case study of 27 prayer healing reports evaluated by a medical assessment team in the Netherlands.

THE SETTING: between 2015 and 2020 a medical assessment team evaluated 27 reports of prayer healing in the Netherlands. OBJECTIVES: Three research questions were formulated. What are the medical and experiential findings? Are there medically remarkable and/or unexplained healings? Which explanatory frameworks can help us understand the findings? METHODS: The reported healings were analyzed using both medical files and patient narratives, as part of a case study research design compiled by a multidisciplinary research team. An independent team of five medical consultants, representing different fields of expertise, evaluated the 27 case files. According to criteria these were selected from a larger group of 83 received reports. Experiential data was obtained by in-depth interviews and analyzed. Instances of healing could be classified as 'medically remarkable' or 'medically unexplained'. Subsequent analysis was transdisciplinary. RESULTS: Eleven of the 27 healings assessed were evaluated as 'medically remarkable', none were labelled as 'medically unexplained'. Recurring characteristics were common to some degree in all healings, whether 'medically remarkable' or not: a temporal connection with prayer, instantaneity and unexpectedness of healing, strong emotional and physical manifestations, and a sense of 'being overwhelmed' and transformed. The healings were invariably interpreted as acts of God. Positive effects have persisted for 5 to 33 years, with 2 relapses. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings on remarkable healings do not fit well in the traditional biomedical conceptual framework. All healings exhibited important non-medical aspects, whether or not they were assessed as medically remarkable. We need a broader multi-perspective approach in which all relevant data is considered to be valuable, both experiential and objective. This so-called horizontal epistemology may be helpful when trying to understand the findings, and it may bring about mutual understanding between patients, health practitioners and relevant disciplines.

Three cases of hearing impairment with surprising subjective improvements after prayer. What can we say when analyzing them?

AIM: to enhance the understanding of documented mismatches between 'subjective' experiences and 'objective' data in three cases of self-reported instantaneous healing of hearing impairment upon prayer. METHOD: description of three cases taken out of a larger retrospective case-based study of prayer healing in the Netherlands. In this larger study multiple reported healings were investigated using both medical files and patients' narratives through in-depth interviews. A subset of three cases with dramatic subjective reduction of hearing impairment upon prayer was studied. These patients underwent extensive additional investigations at the audiology center of the Amsterdam University Medical Centre. All data was evaluated by an interdisciplinary medical assessment team, subsequent analysis was transdisciplinary. RESULTS: the three case histories with self-reported healing after prayer demonstrated a clear mismatch between subjective experiences and objective findings. No measurable improvements were found in four different audiological testing methods. However, in-depth interviews, hetero-anamnesis and a validated questionnaire all confirmed the healings. The medical assessment team could not label these healings as 'medically remarkable' because of absence of measurable 'objective' changes, but they did consider them as 'remarkable in a broader sense'. On expert consultation no equivalents of mismatches to this extent could be found. The healing experiences of our participants involved their entire being with profound positive effects in different domains of their lives, and a perception of a benevolent God who acted upon them. There was a distinctive pattern, labelled by the participants as a healing of mind, soul and body. CONCLUSIONS: The subjective-objective incongruities that were found were not well understood. We noticed a paradox: the 'objective' measurements did not reflect hearing abilities in daily life where-as 'subjective experiential' data did. The latter could be 'objectified' and validated in various ways. In fact, a rigid distinction between 'objective' and 'subjective' was not relevant here, nor a hierarchy among them. A model leaving room for different causations (horizontal epistemology) complied best with the multi dimensionality we came across.

"My Body Does Not Fit in Your Medical Textbooks": A Physically Turbulent Life With an Unexpected Recovery From Advanced Parkinson Disease After Prayer.

AIM: The purpose of this article is to enhance our understanding of prayer healing by studying a case which was described as a 'remarkable healing' by a medical assessment team at the Amsterdam University Medical Centre (UMC) in the Netherlands. METHOD: This retrospective, case-based study of prayer healing investigated numerous reported healings using both medical files and patient narratives. A medical assessment team evaluated the associated medical files, as well as any experiential data. The instances of healing could be classified as 'remarkable' or 'unexplained.' Experiential data were obtained by qualitative, in-depth interviews. The study was transdisciplinary in nature, involving medical, psychological, theological, and philosophical perspectives. The object was to understand such healings within the broader framework of the science-religion debate. RESULTS: We present the case of a female patient, born in 1959, with Parkinson disease who experienced instantaneous, nearly complete healing in 2012 after intercessory prayer. At that point the disease was at an advanced stage, rapidly progressive, with major debilitating symptoms. High doses of oral medication were required. Following this healing there was no recurrence of her former symptoms, while the remaining symptoms continued to improve. She regained all of her capacities at work, as well as in daily life. The medical assessment team described her recovery as 'remarkable.' The patient reported that she had always 'lived with God,' and that at a point when she had given up hope, 'life was given back to her.' This recovery did not make her immune to other illnesses and suffering, but it did strengthen her belief that God cares about human beings. CONCLUSION: This remarkable healing and its context astonished the patient, her family, and her doctors. The clinical course was extraordinary, contradicting data from imaging studies, as well as the common understanding of this disease. This case also raised questions about medical assumptions. Any attempt to investigate such healings requires the involvement of other disciplines. A transdisciplinary approach that includes experiential knowledge would be helpful. Against the background of the science-religion debate, we feel that the most helpful approach would be one of complementarity and dialogue, rather than stoking controversy.

Conceptual issues in neuroscientific research on empathy.

This paper gives an analysis of some conceptual issues in the neuroscientific study of empathy. The focus will almost exclusively be on a seminal paper by Decety and Jackson (2004) on the functional architecture of empathy. The authors withstand reductionistic tendencies in the exposition of what their findings might mean for the psychology of social cognition. They are aware of the thorny conceptual issues that arise when attempting to bridge intuitive folk psychological conceptions of empathy with explanations offered by social psychology, developmental science, and, most of all, neuroscience. They defend a conception which puts emphasis on the developmental, interactional and human aspects of empathy. In the second part of the paper we will see that this overt contention is at some points at odds with the conceptual framework that underlies the presentation of scientific findings. It will appear that the method of decomposition, i.e., breaking empathy down into (mutually interacting) 'pieces', is difficult to reconcile with the idea that empathy should primarily be defined as an interactional phenomenon. The method of decomposition puts empathy back within the brain, whereas recent philosophical work argues that empathy needs a definition which includes both processes in the empathizing subject and in the person with whom the subject empathizes. In the final part of the paper it is asked whether, how and to what extent it does matter that professionals know about the social neuroscience of empathy and, especially, its underlying conceptual framework. It is argued that conceptual innovations that currently are emerging in social neuroscience do matter for clinical and legal practices. In spite of the limitations mentioned earlier, Decety & Jackson's developmental and interactional approach helps to overcome reductionistic and mentalistic interpretations of human empathy.

Prayer Healing: A Case Study Research Protocol.

Context • Prayer healing is a common practice in many religious communities around the world. Even in the highly secularized Dutch society, cases of prayer healing are occasionally reported in the media, often generating public attention. There is an ongoing debate regarding whether such miraculous cures do actually occur and how to interpret them. Objective • The aim of the article was to present a research protocol for the investigation of reported cases of remarkable and/or unexplained healing after prayer. Design • The research team developed a method to perform a retrospective, case-based study of prayer healing. Reported prayer healings can be investigated systematically in accordance with a step-by-step methodology. The focus is on understanding the healing by studying it from multiple perspectives, using both medical judgment and patients' narratives collected by qualitative methods Setting • The study occurred at Vrije Universiteit (VU) and VU Medical Center (Amsterdam, Netherlands) as well as the general medical practice of the first author. Participants • Potential participants could be any individuals in the Netherlands or neighboring countries who claim to have been healed through prayer. The reports of healing came from multiple sources, including the research team's medical practices and their direct vicinities, newspaper articles, prayer healers, and medical colleagues. Outcome Measures • Medical data were obtained before and after prayer. Subsequently, a member of a research team and of a medical assessment committee made a standardized judgment that evaluated whether a cure was clinically remarkable or scientifically unexplained. The participants' experiences and insider perspectives were studied, using in-depth interviews in accordance with a qualitative research methodology, to gain insight into the perceptions and explanations of the cures that were offered by participants and by the members of the medical assessment committee. The medical findings and participants' experiences were weighed and interpreted based on a transdisciplinary framework, including biopsychosocial and theological perspectives, with reference to a conceptual framework derived from Ian Barbour's typology of positions in the science-religion debate. Conclusion • A case-based, research study protocol that compares medical and experiential findings and that interprets and structures those findings with reference to Ian Barbour's conceptual model is an innovative way of gaining deeper insight into the nature of remarkable and/or unexplained cures.