Trial reportJournal of clinical psychology2025
Using Mindfulness to Manage Moral Injury in Veterans: Feasibility and Satisfaction of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of clinical psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bringing Light into the Dark: Moral Injury and Exploring the Impact of Eliciting Moral Elevation on the Daily Experiences of U.S. Veterans.Journal of religion and health · 2026Article
- The therapeutic role of self-transcendence in moral injury recovery:Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Moral injury prevention and intervention.European journal of psychotraumatology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe present study assessed program feasibility and satisfaction among recent-era veterans who participated in Mindfulness to Manage Moral Injury (MMMI), a live facilitated web-based 7-week mindfulness-based program targeting moral injury among veterans.
methodIn total, 56 post-9/11 veterans were recruited with 28 randomized to the MMMI condition and 28 to the Education and Support (ES) condition. Most participants identified as being White (71.4%), male (66.1%), and had a reported mean age of 41.50 years (Median = 39.50, SD = 9.26).
resultsAmong the 56 participants, 82.1% attended at least one treatment session and 44.6% completed all seven sessions. There were no significant differences in the average number of sessions attended between the MMMI (M = 4.79, SD = 2.70) and the ES (M = 4.68, SD = 2.84) conditions, t(54) = 0.145, p = 0.87. Regarding randomization, there were no statistically significant differences on almost all demographic (i.e., years in military, gender, ethnicity) characteristics and baseline scores on all outcomes across treatment conditions, thus ensuring randomization was adequately met. Of the 56 who consented, 41 (73.21%) completed most study components (i.e., completed baseline and follow-up surveys, at least 1 weekly survey, and attended at least one treatment session). Regarding treatment satisfaction, individuals in the MMMI condition reported higher treatment satisfaction (Cohen's d = 0.66).
conclusionsPreliminary findings suggest MMMI is feasible and acceptable and may be able to reach veterans who may not seek traditional Veterans Affairs Medical Center care or who prefer a web-based program. Given its promise for the treatment of moral injury among veterans, MMMI warrants additional large-scale clinical-trial testing.
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.