Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27182732›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Interventions in the Perinatal Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Billie Lever Taylor, Kate Cavanagh, Clara Strauss

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04876014 (A Guided Mobile-Based Perinatal Mindfulness Intervention - A Randomized Control Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 85 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
13.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04876014 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Guided Mobile-Based Perinatal Mindfulness Intervention - A Randomized Control Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2021 to 2023Enrolled198ConditionsPsychological Distress, Mental Health Wellness 1ArmsGuided Mobile-Based Perinatal Mindfulness Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 283 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Billie Lever TaylorSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Kate CavanaghSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Clara StraussSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Brighton, United Kingdom.
University of Sussex · GBSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perinatal mental health difficulties are associated with adverse consequences for parents and infants. However, the potential risks associated with the use of psychotropic medication for pregnant and breastfeeding women and the preferences expressed by women for non-pharmacological interventions mean it is important to ensure that effective psychological interventions are available. It has been argued that mindfulness-based interventions may offer a novel approach to treating perinatal mental health difficulties, but relatively little is known about their effectiveness with perinatal populations. This paper therefore presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions for reducing depression, anxiety and stress and improving mindfulness skills in the perinatal period. A systematic review identified seventeen studies of mindfulness-based interventions in the perinatal period, including both controlled trials (n = 9) and pre-post uncontrolled studies (n = 8). Eight of these studies also included qualitative data. Hedge's g was used to assess uncontrolled and controlled effect sizes in separate meta-analyses, and a narrative synthesis of qualitative data was produced. Pre- to post-analyses showed significant reductions in depression, anxiety and stress and significant increases in mindfulness skills post intervention, each with small to medium effect sizes. Completion of the mindfulness-based interventions was reasonable with around three quarters of participants meeting study-defined criteria for engagement or completion where this was recorded. Qualitative data suggested that participants viewed mindfulness interventions positively. However, between-group analyses failed to find any significant post-intervention benefits for depression, anxiety or stress of mindfulness-based interventions in comparison to control conditions: effect sizes were negligible and it was conspicuous that intervention group participants did not appear to improve significantly more than controls in their mindfulness skills. The interventions offered often deviated from traditional mindfulness-based cognitive therapy or mindfulness-based stress reduction programmes, and there was also a tendency for studies to focus on healthy rather than clinical populations, and on antenatal rather than postnatal populations. It is argued that these and other limitations with the included studies and their interventions may have been partly responsible for the lack of significant between-group effects. The implications of the findings and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Indexed as

Early Medical InterventionPerinatal CareAnxietyDepressionFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMindfulnessOutcome Assessment, Health CarePregnancyPublication BiasStress, Psychological

Identifiers

PMID27182732
PMCPMC4868288
OpenAlexW2350328130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.