Cited by 35

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating mindfulness training for medical and PhD nursing students

Noble, Helen, Reid, Joanne, Walsh, Ian K, Ellison, Sharon E, McVeigh, Clare·2019·British Journal of Nursing

Abstract

Background: it is recognised that mindfulness training can positively impact holistic wellbeing and can improve mood, focus and resilience. Health service students often experience high levels of psychological morbidity. Engaging in mindfulness techniques may positively impact the psychological wellbeing of healthcare students. This is of vital importance to ensure optimum learning for healthcare practice with its associated challenges. Method: an evaluation was conducted with medical students (n=4) and PhD nursing students (n=6), who took part in a mindfulness-based workshop, followed by five weekly 30-minute sessions of mindfulness training, including a 15-minute meditation exercise. Data collection was carried out at baseline and post intervention, followed by a focus group discussion to elucidate qualitative experiences. Results: significant findings were identified with respect to cognitive mindfulness scores (P=0.02) and resilience (P=0.04). Discussion: data reflected three themes: the impact of mindfulness and maintaining practice, improvements in wellbeing, and improvements in academic endeavour. Conclusions: this evaluation found significant improvements in the ability to cope with stress and increased attention and resilience in all students. Although results are not generalisable in this small evaluation, students reported increased concentration levels and improved focus, both of which are likely to impact positively on any psychological symptoms, particularly those related to workload pressures.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.12968/bjon.2019.28.12.798

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 10.1007/s12671-016-0623-8 · DOI
  2. 10.1515/ijnes-2012-0032 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05183.x · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.ctim.2013.06.005 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1080/03069885.2012.743110 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.08.002 · DOI
  7. 10.1073/pnas.0904031106 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.03.018 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Noble, H., Reid, J., Walsh, I. K., Ellison, S. E., & McVeigh, C.
Affiliations
  • Senior Lecturer, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast
  • Professor, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast
  • Clinical Academic/Senior Lecturer, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast
  • Staff nurse, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast
  • Lecturer. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast
Venue
British Journal of Nursing
Published
2019-06-27
Volume
28
Issue
12
Pages
798-802
ISSN
  • 0966-0461
  • 2052-2819
Cited by
35
References
21
Language
en

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