Baseline trait mindfulness moderates the efficacy of mindfulness interventions and active controls: A meta-analysis of 177 randomised controlled trials.

IF 3.8 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Applied psychology. Health and well-being Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-09 DOI:10.1111/aphw.12550
Kathrin Sieder, Phillip Thiedmann, Martin Voracek, Ulrich S Tran
{"title":"Baseline trait mindfulness moderates the efficacy of mindfulness interventions and active controls: A meta-analysis of 177 randomised controlled trials.","authors":"Kathrin Sieder, Phillip Thiedmann, Martin Voracek, Ulrich S Tran","doi":"10.1111/aphw.12550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous evidence suggests that benefits of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) may depend on individuals' baseline trait mindfulness (BTM) levels. This meta-analysis investigated moderating effects of BTM on changes in mental health outcomes and trait mindfulness in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of MBIs. A total of 177 primary studies (total N = 13,486), comparing the treatment effects of MBIs against active, treatment-as-usual (TAU) and waitlist control groups, were synthesised via three-level meta-analysis. Lower BTM was associated with larger changes in mental health outcomes (B = -0.14, 95% CI [-0.21, -0.06], p < .001) and trait mindfulness (B = -0.09 [-0.16, -0.02], p = .009) in MBIs and active controls combined. These associations were significantly larger than from those in TAU and waitlist controls. Moderating effects were less tangible for changes in trait mindfulness in MBIs and active controls individually and less tangible in various sensitivity analyses which, however, were confounded by client type across the RCTs. Individuals low in BTM may, by a small effect size, benefit more from MBIs and active control interventions. BTM may thus affect the evaluation of treatment efficacy. MBIs and active interventions could be offered specifically to persons low in BTM.</p>","PeriodicalId":8127,"journal":{"name":"Applied psychology. Health and well-being","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied psychology. Health and well-being","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12550","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous evidence suggests that benefits of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) may depend on individuals' baseline trait mindfulness (BTM) levels. This meta-analysis investigated moderating effects of BTM on changes in mental health outcomes and trait mindfulness in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of MBIs. A total of 177 primary studies (total N = 13,486), comparing the treatment effects of MBIs against active, treatment-as-usual (TAU) and waitlist control groups, were synthesised via three-level meta-analysis. Lower BTM was associated with larger changes in mental health outcomes (B = -0.14, 95% CI [-0.21, -0.06], p < .001) and trait mindfulness (B = -0.09 [-0.16, -0.02], p = .009) in MBIs and active controls combined. These associations were significantly larger than from those in TAU and waitlist controls. Moderating effects were less tangible for changes in trait mindfulness in MBIs and active controls individually and less tangible in various sensitivity analyses which, however, were confounded by client type across the RCTs. Individuals low in BTM may, by a small effect size, benefit more from MBIs and active control interventions. BTM may thus affect the evaluation of treatment efficacy. MBIs and active interventions could be offered specifically to persons low in BTM.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基线正念特质调节正念干预和积极对照的疗效:对177项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
以往的证据表明,正念干预(MBI)的益处可能取决于个人的基线特质正念(BTM)水平。本荟萃分析调查了在MBI随机对照试验(RCT)中,BTM对心理健康结果和特质正念变化的调节作用。共有 177 项主要研究(总人数 = 13,486 人)通过三级荟萃分析对 MBIs 的治疗效果与积极治疗组、常规治疗组(TAU)和候补对照组进行了比较。较低的 BTM 与较大的心理健康结果变化相关(B = -0.14,95% CI [-0.21, -0.06],p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being is a triannual peer-reviewed academic journal published by Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of the International Association of Applied Psychology. It was established in 2009 and covers applied psychology topics such as clinical psychology, counseling, cross-cultural psychology, and environmental psychology.
期刊最新文献
Daily relationship satisfaction and markers of health: Findings from a smartphone-based assessment. Evaluation of a meaning in life intervention applied to work: A randomized clinical trial. Applying machine learning to understand the role of social-emotional skills on subjective well-being and physical health. Subjective well-being of children with special educational needs: Longitudinal predictors using machine learning. Increasing student well-being through a positive psychology intervention: changes in salivary cortisol, depression, psychological well-being, and hope.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1