Cited by 13Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsDigital Mental Health Interventions

A systematic review and meta-ethnographic synthesis of Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy for people with major depression

Open access
Williams, Kate, Hartley, Samantha, Langer, Susanne, Manandhar‐Richardson, Mizla, Sinha, Melissa, Taylor, Peter·2022·Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) is a relapse-prevention intervention for people experiencing major depression. Three qualitative meta-syntheses investigating experiences of taking part in MBCT and/or Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR) across different diagnostic populations reported themes including control, choice, group processes, relationships and struggles. As multiple studies have been published since, we aimed to update, systematically review and synthesize the experiences of participants with depression taking part in MBCT. METHODS: Four databases were searched systematically (PsycInfo, Web of Science, Medline and CINAHL) up to and including 12 November 2021. Twenty-one qualitative studies met the review criteria. All papers were rated as fair using a quality appraisal tool. Meta-ethnography was applied. RESULTS: Across 21 studies of participants with current or previous depression who had participated in MBCT, three overarching themes were developed: 'Becoming skilled and taking action', 'Acceptance' and 'Ambivalence and Variability'. Participants became skilled through engagement in mindfulness practices, reporting increased awareness, perspective and agency over their experiences. Participants developed acceptance towards their experiences, self and others. There was variability and ambivalence regarding participants' expectations and difficulties within mindfulness practices. LIMITATIONS: Many studies were conducted in MBCT-research centres that may hold conflicts of interest. Many studies did not address the impact of the participant-researcher relationship thus potentially affecting their interpretations. Studies were skewed towards the experiences of female participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings help to enhance participant confidence in MBCT, alongside understanding the processes of change and the potential for difficulties. MBCT is beneficial and provides meaningful change for many but remains challenging for some.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cpp.2773

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 73 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Alloy, L. B., Burke, T. A., O'Garro‐Moore, J., & Abramson, L. Y. (2018). Cognitive vulnerability to depression and bipolar disorder. In R. L. Leahy (Ed.), Science and practice in cognitive therapy: Foundations, mechanisms, and applications (pp. 105– 123). Guilford Press.
  2. * Di Toro, B. M. (2016). A pilot study of feasibility factors in mindfulness‐based cognitive therapy in depressed primary care patients (PsyD thesis). California School of Professional Psychology at Alliant International University. https://search.proquest.com/openview/ee86a7d4b5b84a0b831b785fd5c5126e/1.pdf?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
  3. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2022). Depression in adults. Treatment and management. (CG90). Retrieved from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng222 35977056

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, K., Hartley, S., Langer, S., Manandhar‐Richardson, M., Sinha, M., & Taylor, P.
Affiliations
  • Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
  • Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB)
  • Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Chester UK
  • Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Williams, Kate
Venue
Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-08-15
Volume
29
Issue
5
Pages
1494-1514
ISSN
  • 1063-3995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0879
OpenAlex
W4289202011
Cited by
13
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • e-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, major depressive disorder, relapse prevention, participant experiences, mindfulness practice, acceptance, ambivalence, change processes, participant confidence, researcher-participant relationship
MeSH terms
Anthropology, Cultural, Depression, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review