Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36129900›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2022

Effectiveness of online mindfulness-based interventions in improving mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Bendix Samarta Witarto, Visuddho Visuddho, Andro Pramana Witarto, Damba Bestari, Brihastami Sawitri, Tando Abner Sivile Melapi, Citrawati Dyah Kencono Wungu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 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. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Bendix Samarta WitartoMedical Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-7837-756X
Visuddho VisuddhoMedical Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-6780-6207
Andro Pramana WitartoMedical Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0003-4292-3738
Damba BestariDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine Universitas Airlangga/Dr. Soetomo Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Brihastami SawitriDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine Universitas Airlangga/Dr. Soetomo Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Tando Abner Sivile MelapiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Citrawati Dyah Kencono WunguDepartment of Physiology and Medical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-5180-957X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPsychotherapies, such as mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs), are currently needed to tackle mental health problems. Online MBIs have become promising since face-to-face interventions are limited during the COVID-19 pandemic due to lockdown and social distancing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect of online MBIs in improving mental health, mainly depression, anxiety, and stress. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines on several databases for eligible studies up to October 17, 2021. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool. Effect sizes were presented as standardized mean difference (Hedges' g) between the online MBIs and control groups at post-test and follow-up using a random-effects model.

resultsEight randomized controlled trials involving 868 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled adherence rate to online MBIs was 94% (95% CI = 91% to 98%). The findings revealed that online MBIs had a statistically significant small to moderate effect in reducing depression (g = -0.32; 95% CI = -0.49 to -0.14; I2 = 0%), a small effect on anxiety (g = -0.25; 95% CI = -0.43 to -0.06; I2 = 27%), and a moderate effect on stress (g = -0.62; 95% CI = -1.09 to -0.16; I2 = 83%). In addition, significant small effects at follow-up were observed for depression (g = -0.26; 95% CI = -0.48 to -0.04; I2 = 0%) and anxiety (g = -0.28; 95% CI = -0.48 to -0.08; I2 = 0%), but not for stress.

conclusionOnline MBIs have beneficial effects on mental health, particularly depression, anxiety, and stress, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the limitations of the current study, future trials that specifically consider potential effect influencing factors, longer follow-up evaluation, and methodological quality are warranted.

Indexed as

COVID-19MindfulnessCommunicable Disease ControlHumansMental HealthPandemicsRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID36129900
PMCPMC9491555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.