MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377861478 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0286260

Laughter as medicine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies evaluating the impact of spontaneous laughter on cortisol levels

2023· review· en· W4377861478 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsLaughterMeta-analysisPsycINFORandomized controlled trialMedicinePlaceboPsychological interventionMEDLINEClinical psychologyPsychologyInternal medicineAlternative medicinePsychiatryPathologyNeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Laughter as an expression of humor has been recognized as good medicine for centuries. The health benefits of humor-induced well-being remain unclear and thus we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies to evaluate the impact of spontaneous laughter on stress response as measured by cortisol levels. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Clinicaltrials.gov. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Interventional studies, which could be either randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental studies, conducted in adults that compared any spontaneous laughter intervention to a controlled setting and reported changes in cortisol levels were selected. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We examined the impact of laughter on percentage change in cortisol levels by calculating pooled estimates of the absolute differences between arithmetic means before and after interventions as compared to control using random-effects model. RESULTS: Eight studies (315 participants; mean age 38.6) met our inclusion criteria; four were RCTs and four were quasi-experiment studies. Five studies evaluated the impact of watching a humor/comedy video, two studies evaluating laughter sessions administered by a trained laughter therapist, and one study evaluating a self-administered laughter program. Pooling these data showed a significant reduction in cortisol levels by 31.9% (95%CI -47.7% to -16.3%) induced by laughter intervention compared to control group with no evidence of publication bias (P = 0.66). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that even a single laughter session induced a significant reduction of 36.7% in cortisol (95%CI -52.5% to -20.8%). In addition, analyses including the four RCTs reinforced these results by demonstrating a significant reduction in cortisol levels promoted by laughter as compared to the placebo arm [-37.2% (95%CI -56.3% to -18.1%)]. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence demonstrates that spontaneous laughter is associated with greater reduction in cortisol levels as compared with usual activities, suggesting laughter as a potential adjunctive medical therapy to improve well-being. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: CRD42021267972.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.683
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.111 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it