Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34279240›Full record

ReviewJMIR mental health2021

New Evidence in the Booming Field of Online Mindfulness: An Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Marion Sommers-Spijkerman, Judith Austin, Ernst Bohlmeijer, Wendy Pots

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

Review in JMIR mental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05027113 (App-Based Mindfulness Meditation for People of Color Who Experience Race-Related Stress), which is not on this map. Cited by 67 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT05027113 nacompletednot on this map

App-Based Mindfulness Meditation for People of Color Who Experience Race-Related Stress: A Randomized Control Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, Los AngelesRan2021 to 2022Enrolled155ConditionsStress, Psychological, Anxiety, Depression, RuminationArmsMindfulness meditation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effectiveness, Acceptance, and Negative Effects ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 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.

Marion Sommers-SpijkermanDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy Science and Sports, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0648-8708
Judith AustinDepartment of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5338-7558
Ernst BohlmeijerDepartment of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7861-1245
Wendy PotsDepartment of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2429-6083

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need to regularly update the evidence base on the effectiveness of online mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs), especially considering how fast this field is growing and developing.

objectiveThis study presents an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of online MBIs on mental health and the potential moderators of these effects.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature search in PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science up to December 4, 2020, and included 97 trials, totaling 125 comparisons. Pre-to-post and pre-to-follow-up between-group effect sizes (Hedges g) were calculated for depression, anxiety, stress, well-being, and mindfulness using a random effects model.

resultsThe findings revealed statistically significant moderate pre-to-post effects on depression (g=0.34, 95% CI 0.18-0.50; P<.001), stress (g=0.44, 95% CI 0.32-0.55; P<.001), and mindfulness (g=0.40, 95% CI 0.30-0.50; P<.001) and small effects on anxiety (g=0.26, 95% CI 0.18-0.33; P<.001). For well-being, a significant small effect was found only when omitting outliers (g=0.22, 95% CI 0.15-0.29; P<.001) or low-quality studies (g=0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.41; P<.001). Significant but small follow-up effects were found for depression (g=0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.38) and anxiety (g=0.23, 95% CI 0.13-0.32). Subgroup analyses revealed that online MBIs resulted in higher effect sizes for stress when offered with guidance. In terms of stress and mindfulness, studies that used inactive control conditions yielded larger effects. For anxiety, populations with psychological symptoms had higher effect sizes. Adherence rates for the interventions ranged from 35% to 92%, but most studies lacked clear definitions or cut-offs.

conclusionsOur findings not only demonstrate that online MBIs are booming but also corroborate previous findings that online MBIs are beneficial for improving mental health outcomes in a broad range of populations. To advance the field of online MBIs, future trials should pay specific attention to methodological quality, adherence, and long-term follow-up measurements.

Indexed as

interventionmental healthmeta-analysismindfulnessmobile phoneonline

Identifiers

PMID34279240
PMCPMC8329762

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.