Why Sham Reiki Matters: Improving the Quality of Reiki Research

A new CRR scoping review examining Reiki research highlights an important challenge in evaluating Reiki scientifically: how to design an appropriate sham Reiki control.

Just published in Complementary Therapies in Medicine, the open access Investigation and Assessment of Sham Reiki Protocols in Reiki Research investigated the prevalence of including sham groups in published studies, types of sham protocols used, the training and types of sham practitioners, and whether the sham procedures produced a placebo effect.

Researchers Ann Baldwin, Patricia DeLeon, and Natalie Dyer reviewed 154 published Reiki studies and found that only 35 (22%) met their inclusion criteria for having a sham Reiki protocol that could be meaningfully assessed. The review examined how sham practitioners were trained, how closely sham procedures resembled genuine Reiki, and whether participants could distinguish between the two conditions.

The findings point to substantial variation in sham Reiki methodology. Additionally, differences in practitioner behavior, intention, positioning, communication, or treatment procedures can unintentionally reveal which participants are receiving genuine Reiki.

The authors emphasize that poorly designed sham controls can weaken the validity of clinical trials and make it difficult to determine whether observed outcomes are attributable specifically to Reiki or to nonspecific effects associated with receiving an intervention.

For Reiki research to advance, the study underscores the need for standardized, carefully validated sham protocols. Stronger control methods could improve the rigor, reproducibility, and credibility of future Reiki clinical trials.

Did you know it costs approximately $3,500 to publish an open access paper? If you find this content useful, please help CRR publish more open access papers and donate today.