Trial reportBMC psychology2024
Centering and flourishing: an online intervention study assessing the effects of a Christian contemplative practice on stress-reduction and human flourishing.
Trial report in BMC psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond mindfulness: how Buddhist meditation transforms consciousness through distinct psychological pathways.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite widespread engagement in contemplative religious practices, comparatively little research has been conducted on their potential effects on well-being. Furthermore, few studies have focused on how an explicitly religious framing may impact the outcomes of such practices. In this online randomized controlled trial (N = 702), we tested the well-being effects of a contemplative prayer practice called Centering Prayer on self-identifying Christians. We compared 1) presenting the practice with an explicitly religious framing (experimental condition), 2) presenting the practice without an explicitly religious framing (active control), and 3) presenting simple instructions to reflect on the day, without any instructions regarding a meditation-like practice (passive control). After randomization into one of these three conditions, participants were asked to complete their assigned practice daily for 28 days. We hypothesized that the religious framing version of the practice would increase well-being over the active and passive control conditions. Well-being was assessed at three follow-up time points: one day, one week, and one month after the practice period. We found no group differences between the conditions on our primary outcome measure of well-being at one-week post-intervention. Each group increased in well-being from baseline to follow-up. We found significant group differences on acute measures of spiritual experience, the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ-30) and Daily Spiritual Experience Questionnaire (DSES). These results suggest that a religious framing may not enhance well-being effects but may alter spiritual outcomes related to contemplative practices.
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.