Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36498174›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Mindfulness on Rumination in Patients with Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Pan Li, Lingyun Mao, Maorong Hu, Zihang Lu, Xin Yuan, Yanyan Zhang, Zhizhong Hu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pan LiDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3179-876X
Lingyun MaoDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8366-1810
Maorong HuDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.
Zihang LuDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.
Xin YuanDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.
Yanyan ZhangDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.
Zhizhong HuDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang 330006, China.
Nanchang University · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81960261Research And Cultivation Fund for Young Talents of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University PRJ-20211018180007878
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To systematically evaluate the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) on rumination among patients with depression and their efficacy across countries and year of publication and control conditions. Methods: Web of Science Core Collection, Medline, BIOSIS Citation Index, KCI-Korean Journal Database, SciELO Citation Index, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched to include randomized controlled trials of MBIs for depressive rumination that met the criteria. The Rumination Scale was used as the primary outcome indicator; Depression, mindfulness, and anxiety indexes were selected as the secondary outcome indicators. An evaluation of bias risk was conducted to identify possible sources of bias based on methodological and clinical factors. RevMan5.3 software was used to perform a meta-analysis of the extracted data. Results: Nineteen studies with 1138 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that MBIs could significantly reduce rumination levels in patients with depression (standardized mean difference (SMD) = −0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.58, −0.34; p < 0.001), notably improve depression (SMD = −0.58; 95% CI: −0.83, −0.32; p < 0.001), enhance mindfulness ability (SMD = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.57, 1.32; p < 0.001), and reduce the anxiety of patients with depression (SMD = −0.45, 95% CI: −0.62, −0.27; p < 0.001). MBIs conducted in Asia improved rumination better than studies in Europe and North America (SMD = −2.05 95% CI: −4.08, −0.01; p < 0.001) but had no greater effect than behavior activation on depression. The interventions carried out in the past 5 years were significantly better than earlier studies in improving mindfulness levels (SMD = 2.74; 95% CI: 0.81, 4.66; p = 0.005). Conclusions: MBIs are effective in the treatment of depression as they produce pleasant improvement in rumination and depression, decrease the degree of anxiety, and enhance mindfulness levels compared to controls. In newer forms of MBIs, regional differences need to be considered when designing the intervention program. More large, high-quality randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm the conclusion that the effectiveness of MBIs has differences in terms of the trial area and year of publication.

Indexed as

Depressive DisorderMindfulnessAnxietyAnxiety DisordersHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicdepressiondepressive ruminationmeta-analysismindfulness-based intervention

Identifiers

PMID36498174
PMCPMC9737922
OpenAlexW4311195126

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.