Effectiveness of Online Mindfulness

The article “Effectiveness of online mindfulness-based interventions in improving mental health: A review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials,” by M.P.J. Spijkerman, W.T.M. Pots, E.T. Bohlmeijer caught my eye personally because I am really interested in mental health and ways to improve it. This article talks about the effectiveness of online mindfulness-based interventions compared to other controls.

Introduction

The article’s introductory paragraph first explains what mindfulness is and what it is used for. Mindfulness can be described as, “The ability to observe thoughts, bodily sensations or feelings in the present moment with an open and accepting orientation toward one’s experiences.

” It is used in mental health as a therapeutic intervention for problems such as anxiety, depression, worry and stress. Evidence meta-analysis have shown MBIs to be effective mostly in reducing anxiety and depression. MBIs have become very popular and with the growth of technology, they have been used more through the use of internet.

MBIs have a lot of advantages and in this article, they explain a survey among 500 adults in the U.S that showed many people prefer online formats for mindfulness meditation interventions more.

Method

Their method consisted of doing a systematic literature search in three different electronic databases. They used search terms that was connected to mindfulness. The search was done three times to find new trials in journal articles and additionally searched three clinical trial registers. After combing through all the duplicate titles, the remaining ones were reviewed by two authors.

Get quality help now

Sweet V

Verified

Proficient in: Mindfulness

4.9 (984)

“ Ok, let me say I’m extremely satisfy with the result while it was a last minute thing. I really enjoy the effort put in. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Data extraction was done by the first author (MS) and checked by the second author (WP). Using seven criteria based on the Jadad scale and the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias, two authors assessed the methodological quality of each study. One point was assigned for each criterion setting the max at 7 points. When all seven criteria were met, the quality of the study was considered “high”. If five to six criteria were met, the study was “medium” and if four or less were met, it was assessed as “low”. Effect sizes were calculated per outcome variable (depression, anxiety, stress, and well-being) for each comparison between an online MBI and a control group. For well-being, they used instruments relating to well-being such as life satisfaction. If more than one instrument was used to measure depression, anxiety, stress or well-being, the most valid instrument was used so that each study outcome had one effect size. For depression, anxiety, stress, well-being and mindfulness, five separate meta-analysis were conducted. Forest plots of pre-post between-group effect sizes were created for each outcome variable, both with or without outliers. Outliers were identified though visual examination. Pre-determined investigative subgroup analyses were done to examine differences in effect sizes based on intervention type, mindfulness, therapist guidance, population, health, psychological and/or physical symptoms. The effects of the study quality and number of intervention sessions were evaluated according to a mixed effects model.

Results

The results of the quality scores ranged from 3 to 7. Three studies were low quality, 2 were high quality and most were medium. All of the studies met the standard of intention-to-treat analysis. The outcomes were distributed as depression in 12 comparisons, anxiety in 11 comparisons, stress in 11 comparisons, well-being in 9 comparisons and mindfulness in 12 comparisons. 8 studies gave follow up data and follow up periods varying between 12 weeks and one year. For depression, the diversity was moderate with 2 outliers found. When they removed the outlier from the analysis, the diverseness reduced. With 11 comparisons, online MBIs were found to have a small effect on anxiety with no outliers and the same moderate diversity as for depression. When removing the low-quality studies from the examination, everything remained the same. For stress, a moderate and significant effect was found. The diversity was notably large with one outlier and when the outlier was removed, the effect reduced but remained in a moderate range. The effect on well-being was pretty significant, but still small and the diversity was low with no outliers. For mindfulness, they compared the effects of an online MBI to a control condition in 10 studies which in total was 12 comparisons. They found that online MBIs have a significant impact on mindfulness, low diversity and one outlier. Without the outlier, the effect was the same with no diversity.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the aim of this analysis was to find the overall effect of online MBI’s on mindfulness. The findings of effect for stress and mindfulness were very strong. The findings for stress show as the most promising because the observed effect of online MBIs on stress is comparable to the effect size found for traditional mindful based stress reduction and mindful based cognitive therapy. The study found that online MBIs had a big effect on stress and mindfulness, but it also revealed that for depression and anxiety it had a lower effect than face-to-face. Many say that online MBIs and face-to-face are equally effective, but through all this research, we can see that for depression and anxiety, face-to-face is more effective and for stress and mindfulness, online is more effective.

“Mindful-Based Interventions” is an article found on a website called “Good Therapy.” This article explains that there isn’t just one definition for mindfulness, that there is a variety of understanding of it. One definition it provides is that mindfulness is when an individual becomes more aware of one’s physical, emotional, and mental emotion in the present moment. It goes on to explain the different things MBIs are used for, not just in mental health. It also tells that mindfulness roots from ancient Buddhist traditions. The article then goes into depth of the different techniques of MBIs. For example, techniques such as meditations, gentle yoga exercises, and breathing exercises. According to the article, Mindful based interventions can help by enabling people to become better at separating themselves from negative thoughts that can lead to problems such as depression, anxiety, and stress. People who are able to get to this state of awareness, apparently, find it easier to implement other therapeutic ways to keep them from falling into those negative conditions. Practicing mindfulness regularly is believed to help the growth of psychological insight and emotional healing over time.

Between the two articles, the type of data and information is very different. The fist article’s data is more scientific based and researched. As for the second article, the information it gave wasn’t so factual or backed up with research findings. The audience of the first article is for people in the scientific field of mental health while the second article is pointed towards the everyday person. In the first article the language used is very difficult for someone not in the field to read, I had to re-read many times and look up some terms. If I was to do a scholarly report I definitely would be using the first article because of the findings it has and the research it used to support its findings. I think relying on only one type of article won’t give you the broad range of facts and research you need. I think to come to a conclusion about something, you should be looking at all the different studies, findings, and arguments to see other people’s perspectives. One may not find details you need in order to commit to one side of things.