The mechanisms of mindfulness-based stress reduction and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for cancer patients and survivors: A systematic review.

IF 1.4 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychology of Consciousness-Theory Research and Practice Pub Date : 2023-06-15 DOI:10.1037/cns0000362
Lauren M. Carney, Crystal L. Park, Pooja Hingorany
{"title":"The mechanisms of mindfulness-based stress reduction and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for cancer patients and survivors: A systematic review.","authors":"Lauren M. Carney, Crystal L. Park, Pooja Hingorany","doi":"10.1037/cns0000362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While many systematic reviews have focused on relationships between mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) and myriad outcomes, no systematic review has examined the mechanisms through which MBIs affect outcomes in the context of cancer. A systematic review was conducted of experimental or quasi-experimental studies that longitudinally examined potential mechanisms of the effects of either mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) or mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) interventions with adult cancer patients and survivors. Searches were conducted in Pubmed, APA PsycInfo, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane, and Scopus databases up to May 2022. The results of included studies were narratively synthesized and studies were graded for quality using a rubric tailored to mediational intervention studies. Of 156 experimental or quasi-experimental studies that implemented either MBSR or MBCT interventions with adult cancer patients and survivors, only 13 longitudinally tested for mediators (e.g., changes in mindfulness, rumination, and self-compassion) of intervention effects. Most studies lacked a strong, active control group and most (10/13) were of medium quality. Results on mindfulness as a mediator of intervention effects were inconclusive, and many other mediators were only tested within a single study. Methodological limitations, including lack of strong comparison groups and theoretical frameworks and inconsistent conceptualizations of mindfulness, preclude drawing strong conclusions from the current body of evidence. MBIs may operate differently for cancer patients/survivors, highlighting the importance of continuing to test for mediation within this population.","PeriodicalId":52129,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Consciousness-Theory Research and Practice","volume":"159 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Consciousness-Theory Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While many systematic reviews have focused on relationships between mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) and myriad outcomes, no systematic review has examined the mechanisms through which MBIs affect outcomes in the context of cancer. A systematic review was conducted of experimental or quasi-experimental studies that longitudinally examined potential mechanisms of the effects of either mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) or mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) interventions with adult cancer patients and survivors. Searches were conducted in Pubmed, APA PsycInfo, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane, and Scopus databases up to May 2022. The results of included studies were narratively synthesized and studies were graded for quality using a rubric tailored to mediational intervention studies. Of 156 experimental or quasi-experimental studies that implemented either MBSR or MBCT interventions with adult cancer patients and survivors, only 13 longitudinally tested for mediators (e.g., changes in mindfulness, rumination, and self-compassion) of intervention effects. Most studies lacked a strong, active control group and most (10/13) were of medium quality. Results on mindfulness as a mediator of intervention effects were inconclusive, and many other mediators were only tested within a single study. Methodological limitations, including lack of strong comparison groups and theoretical frameworks and inconsistent conceptualizations of mindfulness, preclude drawing strong conclusions from the current body of evidence. MBIs may operate differently for cancer patients/survivors, highlighting the importance of continuing to test for mediation within this population.
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
正念减压和正念认知疗法对癌症患者和幸存者的作用机制:系统综述。
虽然许多系统综述关注的是基于正念的干预(mbi)与无数结果之间的关系,但没有系统综述研究过mbi在癌症背景下影响结果的机制。对实验或准实验研究进行了系统回顾,这些研究纵向检查了正念减压(MBSR)或正念认知疗法(MBCT)干预对成年癌症患者和幸存者的潜在影响机制。在Pubmed, APA PsycInfo,护理和联合健康文献累积索引,Cochrane和Scopus数据库中进行了检索,截止到2022年5月。对纳入研究的结果进行叙述性综合,并使用适合于中介干预研究的标准对研究的质量进行分级。在156项对成年癌症患者和幸存者实施MBSR或MBCT干预的实验或准实验研究中,只有13项纵向测试了干预效果的中介(例如,正念、反刍和自我同情的变化)。大多数研究缺乏一个强有力的、积极的对照组,大多数(10/13)为中等质量。正念作为干预效果中介的结果尚无定论,许多其他中介仅在单一研究中进行了测试。方法上的限制,包括缺乏强有力的比较组和理论框架,以及不一致的正念概念,阻碍了从目前的证据中得出强有力的结论。mbi对癌症患者/幸存者的作用可能不同,这突出了在这一人群中继续测试调解的重要性。
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
4.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
45
期刊最新文献
Supplemental Material for Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response (ASMR): A PRISMA-Guided Systematic Review Sensory-processing sensitivity as a confounder in the positive relationship between mindful awareness and psychological distress: A theoretical review. Autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR): A PRISMA-guided systematic review. Be careful what you wish for: Acceptance of Laplacean Determinism commits one to belief in precognition. The core of me is that which observes: A mixed-methods study of trait-level sense of self.
×
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