Intercessory prayer for the alleviation of ill health.
Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
PubMed 19370557 · doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000368.pub3
What was done
Authors systematically reviewed ten databases (including MEDLINE and EMBASE up to June 2007) for randomized controlled trials comparing personal, focused intercessory prayer (by individuals holding a belief in God or a god) against standard care or other interventions in people with health problems. Data were extracted independently, analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis where possible, and synthesized using fixed-effect and random-effects relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
What was found
Ten randomized trials were included (7,646 patients). Comparing intercessory prayer plus standard care to standard care alone, no statistically significant effects were observed across pooled outcomes: - Mortality: random-effects RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.16; 6 RCTs, n=6,784; I² = 83%). - General clinical state (intermediate or bad outcome): RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 5 RCTs, n=2,705). - Readmission to Coronary Care Unit: RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.30; 4 RCTs, n=2,644). - Re-hospitalisation: RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.22; 2 RCTs, n=1,155).
Why it matters
This Cochrane review synthesizes the clinical trial evidence on intercessory prayer as a healthcare adjunct, showing no clear evidence of therapeutic benefit across hard clinical endpoints to support its clinical recommendation.
Limits
Data on mortality displayed high statistical heterogeneity (I² = 83%). The abstract does not detail specific medical conditions treated, adverse events, or methods for controlling background outside prayer.
Cited by
- contradicts Acts of faith and spiritual rituals have established positive health benefits.