ArticleMindfulness2018
Conceptual Congruence in Mindfulness-Based Weight Loss Intervention Studies.
Article in Mindfulness, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Whether one kind of mindfulness applies to all situations or only some (i.e., scope) is controversial. Eating may not be an everyday behavior subsumed under everyday mindfulness. To rigorously test the efficacy of mindfulness-based weight loss interventions, researchers must use scales that measure the type of mindfulness manipulated by the intervention. The mixed findings of mindfulness-based weight loss intervention studies may be related to the lack of conceptual congruence (i.e., the pairing of interventions and measures of the same scope). The aims of this systematic review were to: (a) describe the scopes of the mindfulness interventions and measures used in mindfulness-based weight loss intervention studies; and (b) compare conceptual congruence to the statistical significance of mindfulness and weight outcomes of each study. All articles published prior to December 31, 2016 were retrieved from PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase. After screening and full-text review, eight articles were included in the review. Five studies paired mindfulness-based eating interventions with general mindfulness measures; two studies paired mindfulness-based eating interventions with eating-specific mindfulness measures; and one study paired a general mindfulness intervention with a general mindfulness measure. There was no apparent relationship between conceptual congruence and the statistical significance of the mindfulness and weight outcomes. However, given other findings and the limitations of this review, further investigation is needed. In particular, future studies should include mediation analyses using both general and eating-specific mindfulness measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.