Skip to content

The Effects of Mindfulness-Based Interventions on Proprioception: A Bayesian Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials

Senyao Du, Guowen Ai, Shiao Zhao, San Fan Ng, Tin Lok Siu, Ziheng Ning

Mindfulness September 25, 2026 DOI: 10.1007/s12671-026-02986-5 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review and Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis Randomized Peer reviewed
Sample size 1,397
Population Participants in studies of mindfulness-based interventions, including older adults
Interventions Mindfulness-based interventions Tai Chi
Topics Meditation
Key findings Mindfulness-based interventions may improve proprioceptive accuracy, with a pooled effect of Hedges' g = -0.70 and Tai Chi showing the largest effect (g = -0.82), particularly in older adults (g = -0.84). However, small-study effects and high heterogeneity mean the magnitude is uncertain and may be smaller than the unadjusted estimate suggests.

Abstract

Proprioception is crucial for physical activities, motor control, balance, and coordination, yet strategies to enhance it remain debated. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) may improve proprioception by enhancing body awareness through attention regulation and body-mind synergy. MBIs offer low intensity, low cost, and good repeatability. This study hypothesized that MBIs improve proprioception indirectly by enhancing sensory awareness and attention regulation. We used Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis to quantify the effects of MBIs on proprioception from studies over the past two decades. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched six databases for studies published between 2005 and 2025. Bayesian models quantified the effects of MBIs, and moderation analysis explored factors influencing the effect size. We included 22 studies (n = 1397) yielding 112 effect sizes. Following our sign convention, a negative Hedges’ g denoted improved proprioceptive accuracy. The main effect model showed that MBIs improved proprioceptive accuracy (g = −0.70; 95% HDI = [−0.96, −0.44]; BF = 4290.00). Subgroup analysis revealed that Tai Chi had the largest credible effect (g = −0.82), and older adults showed the greatest improvement (g = −0.84). However, a significant multilevel Egger test indicated small-study effects, and the model-averaged bias-corrected interval included zero, so the magnitude of the pooled effect remained uncertain. This meta-analysis indicated that MBIs may improve proprioceptive accuracy, with Tai Chi showing the most consistent evidence, particularly in older adults; however, significant small-study effects and high heterogeneity meant the magnitude is uncertain and may be smaller than the unadjusted estimate suggests. The low-intensity nature of MBIs and their promotion of neuroplasticity through sensory awareness and attention regulation may optimize proprioception, offering insights for neurorehabilitation and integrated rehabilitation programs. Preregistration: PROSPERO CRD420250623894. The extracted data, R analysis code, risk-of-bias assessment workbooks, and supporting materials are publicly available on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/9jqgn/ .

Comparable studies

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

Study Year Design Participants
Meditation Programs for Psychological Stress and Well-being Diverse adult clinical populations 2014 Meta-analysis n = 3,515
Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction for Stress Management in Healthy People: A Review and Meta-Analysis Healthy subjects 2009 Systematic review and meta-analysis
The psychological effects of meditation: A meta-analysis. Nonclinical groups of adult meditators 2012 Meta-analysis n = 163
Efficacy of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy in Prevention of Depressive Relapse Adults with recurrent depression in full or partial remission 2016 Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials n = 1,258
Mindfulness‐Based Stress Reduction and Mindfulness‐Based Cognitive Therapy – a systematic review of randomized controlled trials 2011 Systematic review

Explore topics