Skip to content

Comparative effect of different mindfulness-based intervention types and deliveries on depression in patients with breast cancer: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Deqi Zhang, Wenxin Zhao, Lin Yuan, Qiang Chen, Qiling Xu, Xiaoyu Jiang, Hongyan Bi

BMJ Open August 7, 2024 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084564 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol Randomized Peer reviewed
Population Patients with breast cancer
Interventions mindfulness-based cognitive therapy mindfulness-based stress reduction
Topics Depression Meditation
Keywords Breast tumours Mental health Meta-analysis Rehabilitation medicine Systematic review
Citations 1
Key findings This protocol will assess the comparative effectiveness of various types and deliveries of mindfulness-based interventions for mitigating depression in patients with breast cancer.

Abstract

Breast cancer has become the most common cancer worldwide. Various types of mindfulness-based interventions (e.g., mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction) have been conducted in different delivery methods (including face to face and internet delivered) to help patients with breast cancer mitigate their depression. However, at present, there are no studies that compare the effectiveness of all these types and deliveries of mindfulness-based interventions. Therefore, this protocol aims to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of various types and deliveries of mindfulness-based interventions in mitigating depression in patients with breast cancer. This protocol is according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). The electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, The China National Knowledge Infrastructure and OpenGrey, will be comprehensively retrieved for related randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to December 2023. Two reviewers will independently assess the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomised Trials 2.0 (RoB 2.0). The network meta-analysis will be performed using the STATA V.16.0, and the assessment of heterogeneity, inconsistency, publication bias, evidence quality, subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be conducted. This protocol does not require approval from an ethics committee as it is based on previous research findings. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications. CRD42024495996.

Comparable studies

Other systematic reviews and meta-analyses on depression, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Ketamine and Other NMDA Antagonists: Early Clinical Trials and Possible Mechanisms in Depression Participants with major depression in placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized... 2015 Systematic review and meta-analysis
Side-effects associated with ketamine use in depression: a systematic review. Patients with depression 2018 Systematic review
Comparative efficacy of racemic ketamine and esketamine for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis Adults with unipolar or bipolar major depression 2020 Systematic review and meta-analysis n = 1,877
Single-dose infusion ketamine and non-ketamine N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists for unipolar and bipolar depression: a meta-analysis of efficacy, safety and time trajectories Patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar depression 2016 Systematic review and meta-analysis n = 588
Therapeutic effects of classic serotonergic psychedelics: A systematic review of modern‐era clinical studies Patients with cancer- or illness-related anxiety and depression, major depressive... 2020 Systematic review n = 188

Citations in the library

Explore topics