Skip to content

Being mindful of mindfulness interventions in cancer: A systematic review of intervention reporting and study methodology.

Joanne M Shaw, Natasha Sekelja, Diana Frasca, Haryana M Dhillon, Melanie A Price

Psycho-Oncology April 2018 DOI: 10.1002/pon.4651 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review Randomized Peer reviewed
Population Adults with cancer participating in mindfulness-based intervention studies
Interventions Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT)
Topics Meditation
Keywords Cancer Intervention quality Mindfulness-based stress reduction Oncology Systematic review
Key findings Across 30 controlled studies of mindfulness in cancer, none followed standard MBSR, and most modified protocols without adequate documentation or justification. The authors contend that claims of benefit often reflect decreases in sub-clinical supportive care symptoms rather than therapeutic relief of clinically significant psychological disorders, and that reporting and methodology need improvement.

Abstract

While mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) have demonstrated efficacy in clinical populations, the potential therapeutic benefit of mindfulness in the context of cancer is less clear. The aim of this review was to critically appraise mindfulness intervention reporting and study methodology. Studies using randomized control trial design and/or a control arm were included. PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Embase databases between January 1999 and April 2017 were searched. Studies were assessed on (1) reported theoretical framework, (2) intervention description, and (3) justification of modifications to standardized MBSR/MBCT. The overall quality of study design and research methodology were also assessed. Of 30 studies identified, none adhered to MBSR. Modified versions of MBSR were reported in 19 studies. Five studies reported variants of MBCT, 1 used a combination of MBSR/MBCT, and 5 inadequately documented the intervention/ theoretical framework. Overall, component and timeline modifications were poorly documented and justified. Mean intervention contact time was less than standardized MBSR/MBCT protocols. Target outcomes were poorly justified, and 12 studies failed to identify a primary aim, reporting multiple outcomes. Only 9 of 15 studies recruiting clinical populations included clinical cutoffs, and an active therapeutic control was included in 4 studies. Mindfulness is increasingly considered a standard therapy in psycho-oncology. While many studies proclaim benefits, considerable variability, modification to standardized protocols, and claims of benefit often reflect decreases in sub-clinical supportive care symptomology rather than therapeutic relief of clinically significant psychological disorders.

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

Citations in the library

Cited by 5

Cites 27

and 22 more in the library

Explore topics