Explore - A Systematic Review of The Evidence Base for the Lightning Process - 2020 - by Phil Parker et al

Kalliope

Kalliope

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Only abstract available.
(ETA: Sci-Hub: https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/...U4v5h1ylqVsUP8g4eGGbK9ISXiH-cAZbFlEeuoMO4YVGk )

Journal: Explore - The Journal of Science and Healing
A Systematic Review of the Evidence Base of the Lightning Process - by Phil Parker, Aston, L de Rijk

Abstract
Background: The Lightning Process (LP), a mind-body training programme, has been applied to a range of health problems and disorders. Studies and surveys report a range of outcomes creating a lack of clarity about the efficacy of the intervention.

Objective: This systematic review evaluates the methodological quality of existing studies on the LP and collates and reviews its reported efficacy.

Data sources: Five databases, PsycINFO, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, ERIC (to September 2018), and Google and Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies.

Study Selection: Studies of the LP in clinical populations published in peer-reviewed journals or in grey literature were selected. Reviews, editorial articles and studies/surveys with un-reported methodology were excluded.

Data extraction: Searches returned 568 records, 21 were retrieved in full text of which 14 fulfilled the inclusion criteria (ten quantitative studies/surveys and four qualitative studies).

Data synthesis and Conclusions: The review identified variance in the quality of studies across time; earlier studies demonstrated a lack of control groups, a lack of clarity of aspects of the methodology and potential sampling bias. Although it found a variance in reported patient outcomes, the review also identified an emerging body of evidence supporting the efficacy of the LP for many participants with fatigue, physical function, pain, anxiety and depression. It concludes that there is a need for more randomised controlled trials to evaluate if these positive outcomes can be replicated and generalised to larger populations.
 
Last edited:
From Wikipedia about the journal:

Explore has been heavily criticised both for the content it publishes and the beliefs of its editorial team. Its self-description and author information explicitly includes pseudoscientific topics well outside the mainstream of medical practice. Critics have noted this willingness to publish work in areas lacking a scientific basis, and have labelled it a "quack journal" which "doesn't limit itself to just one quackery, the way [the journal] Homeopathy does," a publisher of "truly ridiculous studies," and as a "sham masquerading as a real scientific journal."[2][7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explore:_The_Journal_of_Science_&_Healing
 
John Mac said:
How can Phil Parker the man behind the Lightning Process be allowed to conduct a review of the evidence base for his own product?
Click to expand...
At the end of the Wikipedia article it says the following:

Sadri Hassani, a retired professor of physics who maintains the website Skeptical Educator,[27] said of the journal "The editorial board of Explore says it all! [...] When the executive editor himself publishes books on "knowing the future" and the "healing power of prayer;" and when coeditors-in-chief engage in the exploration of phenomena that do not necessarily fit conventional scientific models and do research on telepathy and psychic healing, what is the purpose of "peer-review?"".[26]
 
From the abstract:

the review also identified an emerging body of evidence supporting the efficacy of the LP for many participants with fatigue, physical function, pain, anxiety and depression

what does physical function mean in this context?
 
Esther12 said:
Google didn't bring up any info on the other authors from KCL - anyone know anything about them?
Click to expand...
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/lisaderijk1
Dr Lisa de Rijk
Change Consultant, Author, NLP Master Trainer, Applied Psychology, Coach
About
Click to expand...

 Consultancy Experience to a diverse range of organisations in coaching, training, facilitation, change management since 1997

 Consultant to Northern Foods Group since 1998. Extensive experience in leadership development, marketing, sales, policy development.

 Consultant to Napp Pharmaceuticals and Mundipharma Research Ltd since 1998. Extensive experience in working with sales, marketing, regulatory affairs, HR and personnel.

 Consultant to NHS primary and secondary care organisations, on issues incorporating policy guidance and implementation into business development, clinical and management processes. Design and delivery of team and management development programmes.

 Advisor to ANLP (Association of NLP). Member of Accreditation Panel

 Vice Chair and Chair of UKCP (UK Council for Psychotherapy) 2003-2007

 Training Standards Officer and Chair NLPtCA (Neurolinguistic Psychotherapy and Counselling Association) 2001-2003

 Steering group of first international NLP Research Conference, Surrey University

 Former Trustee of Cleveland Family Mediation Service 2007-2008

 Advisor to Global NLP Research and Recognition Project
Click to expand...

https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/therapist/lisa-de-rijk/
https://www.awakenschool.co.uk/what-we-do.php
Looks like she trains and accredits people to do NLP. PhD from Surrey uni. I think undergrad degree from KCL?
_______________

J Aston

Couldn't find via KCL. Did a search for 'J Aston NLP' and came up with this one for a Jacqui Aston:
http://www.jacquiaston.com/
I have a BSc (Hons) in clinical PSychology and an MSc in Mental Health from Kings College London. I am a Human Givens Psychotherapist, Clinical Hypnotherapist, and NLP Master Practitioner and certified trainers trainer having trained with John Grinder and Phil Parker. I have run a private therapeutic practice for over ten years and I have experience working in NHS mental health crisis teams on the front line of community care.
Click to expand...

So it looks like we have two NLP practitioners whose only link to KCL is that they studied there in the past.


 
Last edited:
And the evidence-laundering machine goes brrrr

Lessons learned from psychosocial quacks: exaggerate everything, lie lie lie, then point at your own lies to support your future lies. All you have to do is put it out there and self-aggrandize, no one will check, no one will object. Once it's out there you just grow the tiny fraudulent core into a larger fraudulent core.

You let one pseudoscience in, you open the door for all of them and give them the way to accomplish it. It's a simple formula, really. It requires absolutely no effort, just patience and time. You can even just do the same things over and over again, no one will actually check. Absolutely no one.
 
John Mac said:
How can Phil Parker the man behind the Lightning Process be allowed to conduct a review of the evidence base for his own product?
Click to expand...
BPS normalization. When you lower the bar so much it effectively disappears, other things will crawl across.

Peter White was an author of the cancelled IPD review on his own PACE data. The PACE crew were directly involved with the authors of both Cochrane reviews of their own stuff. This is basically normal now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom