ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Systematic review and meta-analysis of effects of standalone digital mindfulness-based interventions on sleep in adults.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. 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.
- Sleep Disorders in Patients with Tics: Towards Personalized Care for Tourette Syndrome.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sleep disturbances and mental health issues represent escalating global health challenges, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and increased digital media consumption. Digital mindfulness-based interventions (DMBIs) have emerged as a scalable and accessible alternative, but no prior meta-analysis has rigorously isolated the effects of standalone DMBIs on sleep and mental health. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Eighteen eligible RCTs were identified, involving a total of 4870 participants for sleep outcomes and 4489 participants for mental health outcomes. Standalone DMBIs significantly improved sleep health with a moderate effect size (Hedges' g = 0.38, p < 0.001; very low-certainty evidence) and mental health with a moderate effect size (Hedges' g = 0.33, p < 0.01; very low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings, and meta-regression demonstrated a dose-response relationship between intervention dose and outcomes. Nevertheless, high heterogeneity and publication bias reduced the certainty of evidence to very low levels. Our findings support the potential of standalone DMBIs as a scalable and cost-effective approach to improve sleep and mental health across diverse adult populations. However, further high-quality research is essential to improve evidence certainty, address adherence challenges, and optimize intervention strategies based on delivery format and population characteristics.
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.