scholarly journals OP62 Mindfulness-based programmes for mental health promotion in adults in non-clinical settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Author(s):  
J Galante ◽  
C Friedrich ◽  
AF Dawson ◽  
M Modrego-Alarcón ◽  
P Gebbing ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julieta Galante ◽  
Claire Friedrich ◽  
Tim Dalgleish ◽  
Ian R White ◽  
Peter B. Jones

Introduction With mental ill health listed as a top cause of global disease burden, there is an urgent need to prioritise mental health promotion programmes. Mindfulness–based programmes (MBPs) are being widely implemented to reduce stress in non-clinical settings. In a recent aggregate-level meta-analysis we found that, compared with no intervention, these MBPs reduce average psychological distress. However, heterogeneity between studies impedes generalisation of effects across every setting. Study-level moderators were insufficient to reduce heterogeneity; studying individual–level moderators is warranted. This requires individual participant data (IPD) and larger samples than those found in existing individual trials. Methods and analysis We propose an IPD meta–analysis. Our primary aim is to see if, and how, baseline psychological distress, gender, age, education, and dispositional mindfulness moderate the effect of MBPs on distress. We will search 13 databases for good-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing in–person, expert–defined MBPs in non-clinical settings with passive controls. Two researchers will independently select, extract, and appraise trials using the revised Cochrane Risk–of–Bias Tool (RoB2). Anonymised IPD of eligible trials will be sought from authors, who will be invited to collaborate. The primary outcome will be psychological distress measured using psychometrically-validated questionnaires at 1 to 6 months after programme completion. Pairwise random-effects two-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted. Moderator analyses will follow a “deft” approach. We will estimate subgroup-specific intervention effects. Secondary outcomes and sensitivity analyses are pre-specified. Multiple imputation strategies will be applied to missing data. Ethics and dissemination The findings will refine our knowledge on the effectiveness of MBPs and help improve the targeting of MBPs in non-clinical settings. They will be shared in accessible formats with a range of stakeholders. Public and professional stakeholders are being involved in the planning, conduct and dissemination of this project. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020200117


2017 ◽  
Vol 211 (4) ◽  
pp. 256-257
Author(s):  
Derek K. Tracy ◽  
Dan W. Joyce ◽  
Sukhwinder S. Shergill

Gloria Gaynor was an early proponent of resilience, winning many converts with her reflections on ‘how you did me wrong I grew strong, and I learned how to get along’. Tapping into this – resilience, not ‘70s disco – to improve mental health outcomes is a growing concept, but does evidence support this sensible, if sometimes loosely defined, idea? Dray et al provide a timely systematic review of 57 randomised controlled trials of universal resilience-focused interventions targeting children and adolescents in school settings. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with control conditions, interventions were effective in reducing depressive symptoms, internalising and externalising problems, and general distress, but not anxiety, hyperactivity or conduct problems. However, there was variation between age groups and duration of intervention. Not all data were amenable to meta-analysis – the inability to divide results by gender being noteworthy – but these findings support the principle of general resilience-focused preventive programmes in this cohort.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document