Cited by 63Gastrointestinal motility and disordersMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsInflammatory Bowel Disease

Association of participation in a mindfulness programme with bowel symptoms, gastrointestinal symptom‐specific anxiety and quality of life

Kearney, D. J., McDermott, K., Martinez, M., Simpson, T. L.·2011·Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Background Stress perception and GI-specific anxiety play key roles in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) is a widely available stress reduction course, which has not been evaluated for IBS. Aim To determine whether participation in MBSR is associated with improvement in bowel symptoms, GI-specific anxiety, and IBS-Quality of Life. Methods This is a prospective study of 93 participants in MBSR. We applied measures of Rome III IBS status, bowel symptoms (IBS-Severity Scoring System, IBS-SSS), IBS-Quality of Life (IBS-QOL), GI-specific anxiety (Visceral Sensitivity Index, VSI), mindfulness (Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire-FFMQ), and functional status (SF-8) at baseline and 2 and 6 months after enrolment. Results At 2 months, participation in MBSR was associated with small nonsignificant changes in IBS-SSS, IBS-QOL and VSI: d = -0.25, d = 0.08, d = -0.16, respectively. At 6 months, there was no significant change in IBS-SSS (d = -0.36); whereas for IBS-QOL and VSI there were significant improvements (IBS-QOL: d = 0.33, P = 0.044; VSI: d = -0.40, P = 0.014). For patients meeting Rome III IBS criteria (n = 43), changes in IBS-SSS, IBS-QOL and VSI were not statistically significant, but there was a significant correlation between the change in VSI and the change in FFMQ across the three time periods (r = 0.33). Conclusions Participation in MBSR is associated with improvement IBS-related quality of life and GI-specific anxiety. Randomised…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04731.x

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kearney, D. J., McDermott, K., Martinez, M., & Simpson, T. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • VA Puget Sound Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Kearney, D. J.
Venue
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-06-09
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
363-373
ISSN
  • 0269-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2036
OpenAlex
W1581780507
Cited by
63
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 9
FWCI
6.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Keywords
irritable bowel syndrome, mindfulness-based stress reduction, mindfulness, visceral sensitivity, bowel symptoms, quality of life, stress reduction, Rome III criteria, IBS-QOL
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Veterans, Mind-Body Therapies, Irritable Bowel Syndrome

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