Trial reportBMJ mental health2026
Effects of a mindfulness-based intervention versus a social contact control in alleviating loneliness among older adults: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLoneliness is highly prevalent among Chinese older adults. Mindfulness-based interventions for older adults (MBOA) have demonstrated potential in alleviating loneliness. However, few studies have employed active controls with long-term follow-up.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the efficacy of MBOA in reducing loneliness compared with social contact control (SCC).
methodsThis parallel, randomised controlled trial (RCT) assigned community-dwelling lonely Chinese older adults (≥60 years) in Hong Kong to MBOA or SCC. Both interventions comprised 8 weekly 1.5-hour group-based face-to-face sessions. Assessments were conducted at baseline, postintervention and at 6-month and 12-month postrandomisation. The primary outcome was loneliness score at 12 months, analysed using analysis of covariance under the intention-to-treat approach. Secondary outcomes included depression, anxiety, health-related quality of life and healthcare utilisation. Changes in psychological measures were analysed using linear mixed models.
findingsA total of 245 eligible participants were randomised to MBOA (n=123) or SCC (n=122). No significant between-group difference in primary outcome was found (mean difference=-0.14, p=0.52, effect size=-0.21), although both groups showed improvement in loneliness (within-group effect size: MBOA=-0.58, SCC=-0.31). MBOA participants reported reduced depressive symptoms and a decreasing trend in anxiety at 6 months compared with SCC.
conclusionThis is the first RCT examining efficacy of MBOA in alleviating loneliness among Chinese older adults using an active control with long-term assessments. MBOA is not superior to SCC in reducing loneliness, although it may reduce psychological symptoms. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: Clinicians could consider prioritising mindfulness-based interventions for lonely older adults when depressive or anxiety symptoms are prominent.
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.