Brief ReportTapping Away at a Misleading Meta-analysis No Evidence for Specificity of Acupoint TappingSpielmans, Glen I. PhD∗; Rosen, Gerald M. PhD†; Spence-Sing, Tess BA∗Author Information ∗Department of Psychology, Metropolitan State University, Saint Paul, Minnesota †Private Practice, Seattle, Washington. Send reprint requests to Glen I. Spielmans, PhD, Department of Psychology, Metropolitan State University, 1450 Energy Park Drive, Saint Paul, MN 55108. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease: August 2020 - Volume 208 - Issue 8 - p 628-631 doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001181 Buy Metrics Abstract Church et al.'s meta-analysis of three studies claimed to support the specificity of acupoint tapping as a therapeutic technique in the treatment of mental health problems. However, our critical analysis found substantial methodological problems and inaccurate statistical analyses, which render their results invalid. Specifically, 1) two included studies did not include participants with documented mental health problems; 2) two included studies did not specifically isolate the effect of acupoint tapping; 3) clear rationales for selected measures were not provided; 4) comparison groups were not bona fide therapies; 5) researcher and therapist allegiances were not controlled; and 6) selection of included studies may have been biased. Further, our attempt to replicate their results failed; we found that acupoint tapping fared no better than comparison groups: k = 3 studies, d = −0.38 (95% confidence interval, 0.10 to −0.87), p = 0.12. We conclude that the Church et al.'s meta-analysis actually found no specific mental health benefits for acupoint tapping. Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.