The effect of emotional freedom techniques on menopausal symptoms, quality of life, and depression level: a randomized sham-controlled trial

Randomized trial 👥 105 participants ⚖️ vs. Sham tapping on non-acupoint locations (identical setup phrases, affirmations, breathing and session structure) plus a no-treatment control arm Moderate rigor ✓ Source-checked 📍 Turkiye

In plain English. One hundred five menopausal women were randomly assigned to real Tapping, tapping on fake points, or no treatment for four weeks. Everything else about the two tapping programs was identical - same phrases, same breathing, same session length - so the only difference was where the women tapped. The real-points group ended with meaningfully lower menopause-symptom, depression, and sleep-complaint scores than both other groups, while the fake-points group looked like no treatment on those measures. Quality-of-life ratings improved in both tapping groups. Hot flashes did not change in any group. The first placebo-controlled Tapping trial in menopausal women, and one of the cleanest tests yet that the specific points matter.

What they found

105

One hundred five menopausal women were randomly assigned to real Tapping, tapping on fake points, or no treatment for four weeks.

Three-arm sham-controlled RCT (n=105): four weekly EFT sessions cut menopausal symptoms 46% (MRS 18.66 to 10.14; d=1.01 vs sham) and depressive symptoms 45% (Meno-D 13.97 to 7.69; d=0.87 vs sham), while sham-point tapping with identical psychological components was indistinguishable from no treatment on symptoms (p=1.000) and flat on depression. Quality of life improved in both tapping arms vs control (EFT vs sham not significant). Hot-flash (vasomotor) and sexual domains were unchanged in all arms.

How the study worked

Who took part Postmenopausal women aged 45-59 (natural menopause >=1 year, no hormone therapy, not selected for symptom severity), two family health centers in Malatya, Turkiye, Dec 2023-Jun 2024; three-arm parallel RCT (block-randomized, allocation concealed, participants and statistician blinded), 35 EFT vs 35 sham tapping vs 35 no-treatment control; four weekly individual 30-45 min sessions delivered by EFT Master-certified researchers (NCT06158672) (n=105)

What they did In a randomized controlled trial, participants were randomly assigned to receive tapping or a comparison condition, then measured and compared.

Compared with Sham tapping on non-acupoint locations (identical setup phrases, affirmations, breathing and session structure) plus a no-treatment control arm

Measured with Menopause Rating Scale (MRS, primary), Menopause-Specific Quality of Life Scale (MSQLS; higher = worse), Perimenopausal Depression Scale (Meno-D), Subjective Units of Experience (SUE)

💡 Where this could help

Menopause sits squarely in the 45-65 audience, and this trial gives three usable, defensible claims at once: symptom reduction, depression reduction, and a large sleep-complaint improvement - each against a blinded structural sham, not just a waitlist. It is also the strongest single answer to the placebo objection: identical ritual on fake points did nothing for symptoms or depression. Do not claim hot-flash relief; that domain was null.

🔬 What to study next

Replication with longer follow-up, intention-to-treat handling, objective or clinician-rated outcomes, and a clinically depressed menopausal sample; a direct comparison against CBT or mindfulness for menopausal symptoms, as the authors themselves recommend.

The full record

Design	Randomized trial
Participants	105 people
Population	Postmenopausal women aged 45-59 (natural menopause >=1 year, no hormone therapy, not selected for symptom severity), two family health centers in Malatya, Turkiye, Dec 2023-Jun 2024; three-arm parallel RCT (block-randomized, allocation concealed, participants and statistician blinded), 35 EFT vs 35 sham tapping vs 35 no-treatment control; four weekly individual 30-45 min sessions delivered by EFT Master-certified researchers (NCT06158672)
Comparison group	Sham tapping on non-acupoint locations (identical setup phrases, affirmations, breathing and session structure) plus a no-treatment control arm
Effect size	Cohen's d = 1.01 — on menopausal symptoms (MRS total, primary outcome), EFT vs sham tapping at posttest: d = 1.01 (EFT 10.14+/-5.96 vs sham 16.80+/-7.21, Tukey p=0.001), computed from author-reported posttest means/SDs; the sham comparison is used as the headline because it is the most conservative arm (EFT vs no-treatment control d = 1.29). Baseline equivalence confirmed (all pretest p>0.05). Secondary between-group posttest effects: Meno-D depression EFT vs sham d = 0.87 (sham within-group change non-significant, p=0.570), vs control d = 1.37; Meno-D sleep subscale EFT vs sham d = 1.30; MRS psychological subscale EFT vs sham d = 1.16. MSQLS total EFT vs sham d = 0.31, NOT significant - both tapping arms improved quality of life vs control. Sham vs control on MRS: d = 0.14, p=1.000. Null domains: vasomotor (hot flashes) and sexual scores did not change in any arm.
Outcome measures	Menopause Rating Scale (MRS, primary), Menopause-Specific Quality of Life Scale (MSQLS; higher = worse), Perimenopausal Depression Scale (Meno-D), Subjective Units of Experience (SUE)
Journal	Menopause
Year	2026
Country	Turkiye
Language	English
Method	EFT / Tapping
Publication type	Study / trial
Verification	✓ Confirmed against the primary source

Read the original study →

Cite this study

APA

Karatas Okyay, E., Guven Santur, S., Ozsahin, Z., & Karakayali Ay, C. (2026). The effect of emotional freedom techniques on menopausal symptoms, quality of life, and depression level: a randomized sham-controlled trial. Menopause. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000002713

This record is part of the Tapping Evidence Base — an openly-sourced, fully-referenced directory of the research on EFT/Tapping. Explore more studies on Other Physical Conditions · Depression