Gonçalves · Psychological medicine 2015 · systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials · n=23 studies

Religious and spiritual interventions in mental health care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 26200715 · doi:10.1017/S0033291715001166 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Authors searched seven databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Collaboration, Embase, SciELO) for randomized controlled trials assessing religious or spiritual interventions (RSI) on mental health outcomes. Studies evaluating intercessory prayer or distant healing were excluded. After screening 4,751 records and evaluating methodological quality, 23 RCTs were included in a systematic review and meta-analysis.

What was found

Meta-analysis demonstrated significant effects of RSI on general anxiety symptoms (p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed significant anxiety reductions for meditation-based RSI (p < 0.001), psychotherapy-based RSI (p = 0.02), at 1-month follow-up (p < 0.001), and when compared against active intervention control groups (p < 0.001). For depressive symptoms, significant differences were observed between 1- and 6-month follow-ups and against active comparison groups (p = 0.05). The abstract reports reductions in stress, alcoholism, and depression across studies, but provides no effect sizes or confidence intervals.

Why it matters

This review synthesizes experimental evidence on whether religious and spiritual modalities offer measurable clinical utility in mental health care, demonstrating specific symptom reduction for anxiety.

Limits

The abstract reports only p-values without effect sizes or confidence intervals, and total participant sample size is not stated. Interventions and outcome measures were highly heterogeneous across trials, with a notable lack of intervention standardization. Long-term durability beyond early follow-up remains unclear.

Cited by