Cited by 1,394Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsHealth, psychology, and well-beingCancer survivorship and care

Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis

Grossman, P, Niemann, L, Schmidt, S, Walach, H·2003·Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2042-7166.2003.tb04008.x

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H.
Affiliations
University of Freiburg (DE)
Venue
Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-12
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
500-500
ISSN
  • 1465-3753 (ISSN-L)
  • 2042-7166
OpenAlex
W2146646200
Cited by
1,394
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 78 · 2018: 87 · 2017: 84 · 2016: 98 · 2015: 121 · 2014: 132 · 2013: 118 · 2012: 105
FWCI
5.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, psychology, and well-being
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
mindfulness-based stress reduction, health benefits, stress reduction, mindfulness meditation, psychological well-being

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