Cited by 80Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsDigital Mental Health InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

A qualitative study with healthcare staff exploring the facilitators and barriers to engaging in a self-help mindfulness-based intervention

Open access
Banerjee, Moitree, Cavanagh, Kate, Strauss, Clara·2017·Mindfulness

Abstract

In order to increase the cost-efficiency, availability and ease of accessing and delivering mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs), clinical and research interest in mindfulness-based self-help (MBSH) interventions has increased in recent years. Several studies have shown promising results of effectiveness of MBSH. However, like all self-help interventions, dropout rates and disengagement from MBSH are high. The current study explored the facilitators and barriers of engaging in a MBSH intervention. Semi-structured interviews with members of healthcare staff who took part in an MBSH intervention ( n = 16) were conducted. A thematic analysis approach was used to derive central themes around engagement from the interviews. Analyses resulted in four overarching themes characterising facilitation and hindrance to engagement in MBSH. These are “attitude towards engagement”, “intervention characteristics”, “process of change” and “perceived consequences”. Long practices, emerging negative thoughts and becoming self-critical were identified as the key hindrances, whilst need for stress reduction techniques, shorter practices and increased sense of agency over thoughts were identified as the key facilitators. Clinical and research implications are discussed.

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 · 10.1007/s12671-017-0740-z

Cites

56 of 56 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?

  • The finding that negative reactions to one's own practice are common is consistent with the wider literature on mindfulness interventions and offers initial support for extending this finding to digital intervention formats.

    “which is consistent with the wider literature on mindfulness interventions and offers initial support for extending this finding to digital intervention formats.”

    From Experiences of Using Digital Mindfulness-Based Interventions: Rapid Scoping Review and Thematic Synthesis (2023) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion reports that some participants experienced negative thoughts or self-criticism during practice and says similar difficulties had been reported in earlier mindfulness research. The Methods describe an online version of the intervention, so the study offers initial evidence relevant to a digital format. But the paper says “some participants,” not that negative reactions are common, and the cited passages do not establish which format those participants used. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A prior inductive qualitative study of 16 health care professionals in a self-help MBI found that longer practices, arising negative thoughts, and self-criticism were key hindrances.

    “The results indicated that longer practices, arising negative thoughts, and self-criticism were key hindrances”
  • The same prior study found that shorter practices, motivation to reduce stress, and feelings of control over thoughts were key facilitators.

    “shorter practices, motivation to reduce stress, and feelings of control over thoughts were key facilitators”
  • In that prior study, over half of the participants opted for the book-based intervention, and themes from the web-based and book-based MBIs were combined.

    “over half of the participants opted for the book-based intervention in this study, and themes identified from engaging with the web-based and book-based MBIs were combined”
  • This theme diverges from the results of a thematic analysis of the experiences of health care professionals who participated in either a web-based or printed self-help MBI.

    “Conversely, this theme diverges from the results of a thematic analysis of the experiences of health care professionals who participated in either a web-based or printed self-help MBI [18].”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Marks, D. F., & Yardley, L. (Eds.). (2004). Research methods for clinical and health psychology. Sage.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Banerjee, M., Cavanagh, K., & Strauss, C.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Strauss, Clara
Venue
Mindfulness
Published
2017-05-25
Volume
8
Issue
6
Pages
1653-1664
ISSN
  • 1868-8527 (ISSN-L)
  • 1868-8535
OpenAlex
W2617929448
Cited by
80
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3
FWCI
5.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Mindfulness (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ChiPrints (University of Chichester) (acceptedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Sussex
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
mindfulness-based interventions, intervention engagement, barriers and facilitators, healthcare workers, dropout, stress reduction, self-criticism, sense of agency, change processes

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