0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Target mechanisms of mindfulness-based programmes and practices: a scoping review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Question

          Mindfulness-based programmes (MBPs) and practices have demonstrated effects in mental health and well-being, yet questions regarding the target mechanisms that drive change across the population remain unresolved.

          Study selection and analysis

          Five databases were searched for randomised controlled trials that evaluate the indirect effects (IEs) of an MBP or mindfulness practice in relation to mental health and well-being outcomes through psychological mechanisms.

          Findings

          27 eligible studies were identified, with only four exploring mechanisms in the context of specific mindfulness practices. Significant IEs were reported for mindfulness skills, decentering and attitudes of mindfulness (eg, self-compassion) across different outcomes, population samples, mental health strategies and active comparators. Evidence gap maps and requirements for testing and reporting IEs are provided to help guide future work.

          Conclusions

          Mindfulness skills, decentering and attitudes of mindfulness may be key intervention targets for addressing the mental health of whole populations. However, future work needs to address significant knowledge gaps regarding the evidence for alternative mechanisms (eg, attention and awareness) in relation to unique outcomes (eg, well-being), mental health strategies (ie, promotion) and active comparators. High-quality trials, with powered multivariate mediation analyses that meet key requirements, will be needed to advance this area of work.

          Trial registration number

          10.17605/OSF.IO/NY2AH.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews.

              Reviews of primary research are becoming more common as evidence-based practice gains recognition as the benchmark for care, and the number of, and access to, primary research sources has grown. One of the newer review types is the 'scoping review'. In general, scoping reviews are commonly used for 'reconnaissance' - to clarify working definitions and conceptual boundaries of a topic or field. Scoping reviews are therefore particularly useful when a body of literature has not yet been comprehensively reviewed, or exhibits a complex or heterogeneous nature not amenable to a more precise systematic review of the evidence. While scoping reviews may be conducted to determine the value and probable scope of a full systematic review, they may also be undertaken as exercises in and of themselves to summarize and disseminate research findings, to identify research gaps, and to make recommendations for the future research. This article briefly introduces the reader to scoping reviews, how they are different to systematic reviews, and why they might be conducted. The methodology and guidance for the conduct of systematic scoping reviews outlined below was developed by members of the Joanna Briggs Institute and members of five Joanna Briggs Collaborating Centres.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMJ Ment Health
                BMJ Ment Health
                bmjment
                bmjment
                BMJ Mental Health
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2755-9734
                2024
                24 August 2024
                : 27
                : 1
                : e300955
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Psychiatry , University of Oxford , Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
                [2 ]departmentCentre for the Psychology of Learning and Experimental Psychopathology , KU Leuven , Leuven, Flanders, Belgium
                [3 ]departmentDepartment of Experimental Psychology , University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [4 ]Universitat Jaume I , Castello de la Plana, Comunitat Valenciana, Spain
                [5 ]departmentTeaching, Research & Innovation Unit , Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu , Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain
                [6 ]Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology & Public Health (CIBER Epidemiology and Public Health - CIBERESP) , Madrid, Spain
                Author notes

                Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

                Additional supplemental material is published online only. To view, please visit the journal online ( https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2023-300955).

                None declared.

                DrShannonMaloney, Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK; shannon.maloney@ 123456psych.ox.ac.uk

                JM-M and WK are joint senior authors.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6939-2298
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8596-5252
                Article
                bmjment-2023-300955
                10.1136/bmjment-2023-300955
                11344521
                60d16b61-890d-4d19-970f-205cf73e5250
                Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 14 December 2023
                : 26 May 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269, Wellcome Trust;
                Award ID: WT104908/Z/14/Z and WT107496/Z/15/Z
                Funded by: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre;
                Award ID: NIHR203316
                Categories
                Systematic Review
                Adult Mental Health
                1506

                depression,adult psychiatry,depression & mood disorders

                Comments

                Comment on this article