Jake Linardon , Mariel Messer , Simon B. Goldberg , Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz
{"title":"正念应用程序对抑郁和焦虑症状的疗效:随机对照试验的最新荟萃分析","authors":"Jake Linardon , Mariel Messer , Simon B. Goldberg , Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Mindfulness apps have become popular tools for addressing symptoms of depression and anxiety. Since the publication of earlier meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy of mindfulness apps for depression and anxiety symptoms, over 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted. There is a need for an updated meta-analysis that quantifies the effects of mindfulness apps on these symptoms and tests for potential moderators.. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted on 45 RCTs. Small, significant effect sizes were found for symptoms of depression (<em>N</em><sub><em>comp</em></sub> = 46, <em>N</em> = 5852, g = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.31, NNT = 13.57) and anxiety (<em>N</em><sub><em>comp</em></sub> = 48, <em>N</em> = 6082, g = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.21, 0.35, NNT = 11.47) in favour of mindfulness apps over control groups. This effect was not explained by symptom deterioration in participants allocated to control groups. Effects remained stable when restricting analyses to lower risk of bias and larger sample trials. No significant moderators were observed, except trials that offered monetary compensation produced larger effects on depression. Non-significant effects were observed when comparing mindfulness apps to active therapeutic comparisons (<em>g</em> = −0.15 depression, <em>g</em> = 0.10 anxiety), though the number of studies was low. Growing evidence indicates that mindfulness apps can acutely reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety, although higher quality studies with longer follow-ups are needed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"107 ","pages":"Article 102370"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001289/pdfft?md5=668b97483fc9d9673086a75c95f698a9&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735823001289-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The efficacy of mindfulness apps on symptoms of depression and anxiety: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials\",\"authors\":\"Jake Linardon , Mariel Messer , Simon B. Goldberg , Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102370\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Mindfulness apps have become popular tools for addressing symptoms of depression and anxiety. Since the publication of earlier meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy of mindfulness apps for depression and anxiety symptoms, over 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted. There is a need for an updated meta-analysis that quantifies the effects of mindfulness apps on these symptoms and tests for potential moderators.. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted on 45 RCTs. Small, significant effect sizes were found for symptoms of depression (<em>N</em><sub><em>comp</em></sub> = 46, <em>N</em> = 5852, g = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.31, NNT = 13.57) and anxiety (<em>N</em><sub><em>comp</em></sub> = 48, <em>N</em> = 6082, g = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.21, 0.35, NNT = 11.47) in favour of mindfulness apps over control groups. This effect was not explained by symptom deterioration in participants allocated to control groups. Effects remained stable when restricting analyses to lower risk of bias and larger sample trials. No significant moderators were observed, except trials that offered monetary compensation produced larger effects on depression. Non-significant effects were observed when comparing mindfulness apps to active therapeutic comparisons (<em>g</em> = −0.15 depression, <em>g</em> = 0.10 anxiety), though the number of studies was low. Growing evidence indicates that mindfulness apps can acutely reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety, although higher quality studies with longer follow-ups are needed.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"107 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102370\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001289/pdfft?md5=668b97483fc9d9673086a75c95f698a9&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735823001289-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001289\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001289","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
正念应用程序已经成为解决抑郁和焦虑症状的流行工具。自从早期评估正念应用程序对抑郁和焦虑症状疗效的荟萃分析发表以来,已经进行了20多项随机对照试验(rct)。有必要进行一项更新的荟萃分析,量化正念应用对这些症状的影响,并对潜在的调节因素进行测试。对43项随机对照试验进行随机效应荟萃分析。小,显著的影响大小为抑郁症的症状被发现(Ncomp = 46,N = 5852 g = 0.24,95% CI = 0.17,0.31,例数十分 = 13.57)和焦虑(Ncomp = 48 N = 6082 g = 0.28,95% CI = 0.21,0.35,例数十分 = 11.47)正念应用控制组织的支持。这种影响不能用被分配到对照组的参与者症状恶化来解释。当将分析限制在低偏倚风险和大样本试验时,效果保持稳定。除了提供金钱补偿的试验对抑郁症产生更大的影响外,没有观察到显著的调节因子。当将正念应用程序与积极治疗比较时,观察到无显著影响(g = - 0.15抑郁,g = 0.10焦虑),尽管研究数量很少。越来越多的证据表明,正念应用程序可以显著减轻抑郁和焦虑的症状,尽管需要更高质量的研究和更长时间的随访。
The efficacy of mindfulness apps on symptoms of depression and anxiety: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Mindfulness apps have become popular tools for addressing symptoms of depression and anxiety. Since the publication of earlier meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy of mindfulness apps for depression and anxiety symptoms, over 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted. There is a need for an updated meta-analysis that quantifies the effects of mindfulness apps on these symptoms and tests for potential moderators.. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted on 45 RCTs. Small, significant effect sizes were found for symptoms of depression (Ncomp = 46, N = 5852, g = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.31, NNT = 13.57) and anxiety (Ncomp = 48, N = 6082, g = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.21, 0.35, NNT = 11.47) in favour of mindfulness apps over control groups. This effect was not explained by symptom deterioration in participants allocated to control groups. Effects remained stable when restricting analyses to lower risk of bias and larger sample trials. No significant moderators were observed, except trials that offered monetary compensation produced larger effects on depression. Non-significant effects were observed when comparing mindfulness apps to active therapeutic comparisons (g = −0.15 depression, g = 0.10 anxiety), though the number of studies was low. Growing evidence indicates that mindfulness apps can acutely reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety, although higher quality studies with longer follow-ups are needed.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology.
While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.