Cited by 1,145Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsDigital Mental Health Interventions

Mindfulness-based interventions for psychiatric disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Goldberg, Simon B., Tucker, Raymond P., Greene, Preston A., Davidson, Richard J., Wampold, Bruce E., Kearney, David J., Simpson, Tracy L.·2018·Clinical Psychology Review

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Despite widespread scientific and popular interest in mindfulness-based interventions, questions regarding the empirical status of these treatments remain. We sought to examine the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions for clinical populations on disorder-specific symptoms. To address the question of relative efficacy, we coded the strength of the comparison group into five categories: no treatment, minimal treatment, non-specific active control, specific active control, and evidence-based treatment. A total of 142 non-overlapping samples and 12,005 participants were included. At post-treatment, mindfulness-based interventions were superior to no treatment (d=0.55), minimal treatment (d=0.37), non-specific active controls (d=0.35), and specific active controls (d=0.23). Mindfulness conditions did not differ from evidence-based treatments (d=-0.004). At follow-up, mindfulness-based interventions were superior to no treatment conditions (d=0.50), non-specific active controls (d=0.52), and specific active controls (d=0.29). Mindfulness conditions did not differ from minimal treatment conditions (d=0.38) and evidence-based treatments (d=0.09). Effects on specific disorder subgroups showed the most consistent evidence in support of mindfulness for depression, pain conditions, smoking, and addictive disorders. Results support the notion that mindfulness-based interventions hold promise as evidence-based treatments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.10.011

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 2 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Finding

    At post-treatment, mindfulness-based interventions were superior to no treatment, minimal treatment, non-specific active control, and specific active control conditions.

    “Mindfulness-based interventions were shown to be superior to no treatment conditions (k = 89, d = 0.55 95% CI 0.47 to 0.63), minimal treatment conditions (k = 4, d = 0.37 95% CI 0.03 to 0.71), non-specific treatment conditions (k = 9, d = 0.35 95% CI 0.09 to 0.62), and specific treatment conditions (k = 42, d = 0.23 95% CI 0.12 to 0.34).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    The authors conclude that mindfulness therapies have an empirical basis and are generally similar in potency to first-line psychological and psychiatric interventions when directly compared.

    “our results suggest that there is an empirical basis for mindfulness-based therapies. Mindfulness treatments were shown, in general, to be of similar potency with first-line psychological (and psychiatric) interventions when compared directly”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    Compared with evidence-based treatments, mindfulness was equivalent for depression and superior for smoking.

    “When compared with EBTs, disorder was a significant moderator (Q[2] = 14.51, p = .001). Mindfulness-based interventions were superior to EBTs for smoking (d = 0.42) and equivalent to EBTs for anxiety and depression (ds = −0.01 to −0.18).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    Across studies, the most commonly studied disorder was depression, and most studies had a follow-up assessment.

    “The most commonly studied disorder was depression (30.41%; see Supplemental Materials Figure 1a). The majority of studies included a follow-up assessment time point (k = 79, 55.63%).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    For no-treatment comparisons, disorder moderated effects at post-treatment, with superiority shown for depression, pain, and schizophrenia.

    “For studies using a no treatment comparison, disorder was a significant moderator (Q[2] = 6.46, p = .040). Mindfulness-based interventions showed superior effects for depression, pain, and schizophrenia, with ds ranging from 0.48 to 1.18 (Figure 5).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Figure 5

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

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?

  • Meta-analyses have found that evidence-based MBIs such as MBSR and MBCT reduce psychiatric symptoms including depression, anxiety, and substance use.

    “MBIs may specifically benefit sexual minority men, as meta-analyses have found that evidence-based MBIs such as Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR; Kabat-Zinn, 2003) and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT; Teasdale et al., 2000) reduce psychiatric symptoms including depression, anxiety, and substance use (Goldberg et al., 2018, 2022), which commonly affect sexual minority men.”

    From Mindfulness for Reducing Minority Stress and Promoting Health Among Sexual Minority Men: Uncovering Intervention Principles and Techniques (2022) · cites this paper as Goldberg et al., 2018

    The Abstract and Discussion report that MBIs improve psychiatric outcomes, with the clearest evidence for depression and benefits for anxiety relative to no treatment. The substance-use claim needs qualification: the Results found no statistically clear advantage over no treatment for addictions, although the Discussion reports support for smoking and addictive disorders. The paper therefore does not establish an unqualified reduction across all three symptom categories. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • MBCT and MBSR are considered evidence-based treatments and are efficacious for various mental health problems and psychiatric symptoms.

    “Currently, both MBCT and MBSR are considered evidence-based treatments and are efficacious for various mental health problems and psychiatric symptoms [44].”

    From Effects of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for Chinese adults with PTSD symptoms: protocol for a randomised controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [44]

    The Abstract and Discussion report that mindfulness-based interventions reduce psychiatric symptoms across several conditions and hold promise as evidence-based treatments. The Method explicitly includes MBCT, but the reported efficacy is for mindfulness interventions as a group; our copy does not establish separately that both MBCT and MBSR are already considered evidence-based treatments. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Pre-post increased observing and reduced reactivity to inner experience mediated the effect of a mindfulness-based intervention against waitlist on pre-post reduction in depression symptoms in stressed meditation-naïve individuals.

    “For example, pre–post increased observing and reduced reactivity to inner experience mediated the effect of an MBI against waitlist on pre–post reduction in depression symptoms in stressed meditation-naïve individuals [33].”

    From Treatment condition as a moderator and change in trait mindfulness as a mediator of a brief mindfulness ecological momentary intervention for generalized anxiety disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results (Synthesis of Results; page unavailable) report that mindfulness-based interventions improved depression outcomes relative to no-treatment controls. But the paper does not report that increased observing or reduced reactivity mediated this effect in stressed, meditation-naïve individuals. The Method (Eligibility Criteria; page unavailable) says elevated stress alone did not qualify a sample for inclusion. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Mindfulness meditation is associated with improved physical health outcomes and pain management.

    “Mindfulness meditation has been associated with improved physical health outcomes and pain management [14].”

    From Mindfulness meditation and psychedelics: potential synergies and commonalities (2023) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Results (Synthesis of Results; page unavailable) report better pain and weight/eating-related outcomes with mindfulness-based interventions than with no treatment, supporting the pain-management part of the claim. The Discussion (page unavailable) also says these interventions performed on par with other active therapies for those conditions. The paper examines disorder-specific outcomes, however, rather than establishing improvements in physical health outcomes broadly. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • MBIs have repeatedly been shown effective in improving coping with negative emotions in patients with mood and anxiety disorders and in patients with chronic pain.

    “MBIs have repeatedly been shown effective in improving coping with negative emotions, both in patients with mood and anxiety disorders (Goldberg et al., 2018) and in patients with chronic pain (Chiesa & Serretti, 2011; Esmer et al., 2010; Garland et al., 2014, 2012).”

    From Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for chronic noncancer pain and prescription opioid use disorder: A qualitative pilot study of its feasibility and the perceived process of change (2023) · cites this paper as Goldberg et al., 2018

    The Results (Synthesis of Results; page unavailable) report that mindfulness-based interventions improved disorder-specific outcomes for anxiety and depression relative to no treatment. The paper assesses symptoms, however, rather than showing that patients improved their coping with negative emotions. The chronic-pain portion of the sentence is attributed to other citations, not Goldberg et al. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Post-treatment moderator test has the wrong degrees of freedom

    Minor

    The specific-active-control analysis lists five disorder categories, which require four degrees of freedom for a test of differences among them, not three. The reported p-value of .305 also corresponds to four degrees of freedom for Q = 4.84.

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goldberg, S. B., Tucker, R. P., Greene, P. A., Davidson, R. J., Wampold, B. E., Kearney, D. J., & Simpson, T. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Louisiana State University (US)
  • VA Puget Sound Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Goldberg, Simon B.
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-02
Volume
59
Pages
52-60
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2767954023
Cited by
1,145
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 116 · 2025: 137 · 2024: 152 · 2023: 144 · 2022: 141 · 2021: 157 · 2020: 183 · 2019: 83 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
12.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (P01AT004952)
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 interventions, mental illness, treatment efficacy, active control, depression, pain conditions, smoking cessation, addiction, follow-up outcomes
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Humans, Treatment Outcome, Meditation, Evidence-Based Practice, 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.

Claims read (extract-v1) on 2026-09-24.

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