CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is mindfulness research methodology improving over time? A systematic review

Open access
Goldberg, Simon B., Tucker, Raymond P., Greene, Preston A., Simpson, Tracy L., Kearney, David J., Davidson, Richard J.·2017·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0187298PMC PMC5663486
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite an exponential growth in research on mindfulness-based interventions, the body of scientific evidence supporting these treatments has been criticized for being of poor methodological quality. OBJECTIVES: The current systematic review examined the extent to which mindfulness research demonstrated increased rigor over the past 16 years regarding six methodological features that have been highlighted as areas for improvement. These feature included using active control conditions, larger sample sizes, longer follow-up assessment, treatment fidelity assessment, and reporting of instructor training and intent-to-treat (ITT) analyses. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, PsychInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science in addition to a publically available repository of mindfulness studies. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized clinical trials of mindfulness-based interventions for samples with a clinical disorder or elevated symptoms of a clinical disorder listed on the American Psychological Association's list of disorders with recognized evidence-based treatment. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Independent raters screened 9,067 titles and abstracts, with 303 full text reviews. Of these, 171 were included, representing 142 non-overlapping samples. RESULTS: Across the 142 studies published between 2000 and 2016, there was no evidence for increases in any study quality indicator, although changes were generally in the direction of improved quality. When restricting the sample to those conducted in Europe and North America (continents with the longest history of scientific research in this area), an increase in reporting of ITT analyses was found. When excluding an early, high-quality study, improvements were seen in sample size, treatment fidelity assessment, and reporting of ITT analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Taken together, the findings suggest modest adoption of the recommendations for methodological improvement voiced repeatedly in the literature. Possible explanations for this and implications for interpreting this body of research and conducting future studies are discussed.

Overview

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0187298

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig 1 PRISMA flow diagram.
Fig 1 PRISMA flow diagram.CC0 · PubMed Central
Fig 2 Proportion of studies using active control conditions over time. The size of each point is relative to the number of studies represented.
Fig 2 Proportion of studies using active control conditions over time. The size of each point is relative to the number of studies represented.CC0 · PubMed Central
Fig 3 Changes in sample size over time.
Fig 3 Changes in sample size over time.CC0 · PubMed Central
Fig 4 Changes in length of follow-up over time.
Fig 4 Changes in length of follow-up over time.CC0 · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 46 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. American Psychological Association. Research-supported psychological treatments. 2017, 1:2. Available from https://www.div12.org/psychological-treatments/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Goldberg, S. B., Tucker, R. P., Greene, P. A., Simpson, T. L., Kearney, D. J., & Davidson, R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Louisiana State University (US)
  • VA Puget Sound Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Goldberg, Simon B.
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2017-10-31
Volume
12
Issue
10
Pages
e0187298
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0187298
PMC
PMC5663486
OpenAlex
W2766462050
Cited by
125
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (P01AT004952)
  • Mind and Life Institute (Varela Award)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
mindfulness-based interventions, methodological quality, active control, sample size, follow-up evaluation, intervention fidelity, intention-to-treat analysis, instructor training, reporting quality, clinical disorders, evidence-based treatment
MeSH terms
Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, 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.

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