Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30638824›Full record

ReviewClinical psychology review2019

Doing no harm in mindfulness-based programs: Conceptual issues and empirical findings.

Ruth Baer, Catherine Crane, Edward Miller, Willem Kuyken

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical psychology review, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06522243 (Effectiveness of Mindfulness Program for Parents of Children With SEN), which is not on this map. Cited by 109 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06522243 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of Mindfulness Program for Parents of Children With SEN

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2024 to 2027Enrolled120ConditionsExpressed Emotion, Stress, Well-Being, PsychologicalArms8-week mindful parenting program
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

109 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Meditation, mindfulness, and acceptance methods in psychotherapy: A systematic review.Psychotherapy research : journal of the Society for Psychotherapy Research · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The Empirical Status of Mindfulness-Based Interventions: A Systematic Review of 44 Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

49 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

4 authors.

Ruth BaerUniversity of Kentucky, USA. Electronic address: rbaer@email.uky.edu.
Catherine CraneUniversity of Oxford, UK.
Edward MillerUniversity of Oxford, UK.
Willem KuykenUniversity of Oxford, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 104908/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The benefits of empirically supported mindfulness-based programs (MBPs) are well documented, but the potential for harm has not been comprehensively studied. The available literature, although too small for a systematic review, suggests that the question of harm in MBPs needs careful attention. We argue that greater conceptual clarity will facilitate more systematic research and enable interpretation of existing findings. After summarizing how mindfulness, mindfulness practices, and MBPs are defined in the evidence-based context, we examine how harm is understood and studied in related approaches to physical or psychological health and wellbeing, including psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and physical exercise. We also review research on harmful effects of meditation in contemplative traditions. These bodies of literature provide helpful parallels for understanding potential harm in MBPs and suggest three interrelated types of factors that may contribute to harm and require further study: program-related factors, participant-related factors, and clinician- or teacher-related factors. We discuss conceptual issues and empirical findings related to these factors and end with recommendations for future research and for protecting participants in MBPs from harm.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based PracticeHumansMindfulnessAdverse outcomesHarmMindfulnessMindfulness-based programs

Identifiers

PMID30638824
PMCPMC6575147

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.