学校课程中的正念?一项针对丹麦小学9 - 16岁学生实施正念干预的有效性的全国性集群随机试验

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lise Juul , Morten Frydenberg , Emilie Hasager Bonde , Michelle Sand Beck , Katinka Goetzsche , Heidi Berg Nielsen , Lone Overby Fjorback
{"title":"学校课程中的正念?一项针对丹麦小学9 - 16岁学生实施正念干预的有效性的全国性集群随机试验","authors":"Lise Juul ,&nbsp;Morten Frydenberg ,&nbsp;Emilie Hasager Bonde ,&nbsp;Michelle Sand Beck ,&nbsp;Katinka Goetzsche ,&nbsp;Heidi Berg Nielsen ,&nbsp;Lone Overby Fjorback","doi":"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a teacher-training program for integrating a ten-session, school-based mindfulness program into regular classroom instruction in Danish elementary schools. The focus was on the mental health of students in grades 4 to 9. The primary study population comprised at-risk students, with the total students serving as a secondary study population. We also examined whether intervention effects were modified by sex and grade.</div><div>In a nationwide cluster-randomized trial in 2019–2020 (during COVID-19), schools were randomized 1:1 to either the intervention (54 schools, 97 teachers, 836 students, including 186 at-risk students) or teaching as usual (56 schools, 94 teachers, 892 students, including 165 at-risk students). Thirteen validated self-report measures of mental health were collected at baseline, five, and eight months, with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Total Difficulties Score as the primary outcome. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed using mixed-effects linear regression models and bootstrapping.</div><div>Follow-up data were obtained from 25 intervention schools (605 students, including 129 at-risk) and 28 teaching-as-usual schools (745 students, including 143 at-risk). Among at-risk students, Cohen's d for the Total Difficulties score at eight months was 0.05 (95 % CI -0.29 to 0.40), and no statistically significant effect was observed in the total study population.</div><div>Secondary analyses indicated that the intervention led to increased perceived hyperactivity/inattention—particularly among boys and younger students—and poorer self-rated health among at-risk students.</div><div>A deeper understanding of the mechanisms in school-based mindfulness-based interventionss and key factors for implementing them with fidelity requires further investigation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49122,"journal":{"name":"Social Science & Medicine","volume":"378 ","pages":"Article 118117"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mindfulness in the school curriculum? A nationwide cluster-randomized trial of the effectiveness of implementing a mindfulness-based intervention for 9–16-year-olds students in Danish elementary schools\",\"authors\":\"Lise Juul ,&nbsp;Morten Frydenberg ,&nbsp;Emilie Hasager Bonde ,&nbsp;Michelle Sand Beck ,&nbsp;Katinka Goetzsche ,&nbsp;Heidi Berg Nielsen ,&nbsp;Lone Overby Fjorback\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a teacher-training program for integrating a ten-session, school-based mindfulness program into regular classroom instruction in Danish elementary schools. The focus was on the mental health of students in grades 4 to 9. The primary study population comprised at-risk students, with the total students serving as a secondary study population. We also examined whether intervention effects were modified by sex and grade.</div><div>In a nationwide cluster-randomized trial in 2019–2020 (during COVID-19), schools were randomized 1:1 to either the intervention (54 schools, 97 teachers, 836 students, including 186 at-risk students) or teaching as usual (56 schools, 94 teachers, 892 students, including 165 at-risk students). Thirteen validated self-report measures of mental health were collected at baseline, five, and eight months, with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Total Difficulties Score as the primary outcome. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed using mixed-effects linear regression models and bootstrapping.</div><div>Follow-up data were obtained from 25 intervention schools (605 students, including 129 at-risk) and 28 teaching-as-usual schools (745 students, including 143 at-risk). Among at-risk students, Cohen's d for the Total Difficulties score at eight months was 0.05 (95 % CI -0.29 to 0.40), and no statistically significant effect was observed in the total study population.</div><div>Secondary analyses indicated that the intervention led to increased perceived hyperactivity/inattention—particularly among boys and younger students—and poorer self-rated health among at-risk students.</div><div>A deeper understanding of the mechanisms in school-based mindfulness-based interventionss and key factors for implementing them with fidelity requires further investigation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Science & Medicine\",\"volume\":\"378 \",\"pages\":\"Article 118117\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Science & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625004472\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625004472","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在调查一项教师培训计划的有效性,以整合丹麦小学正规课堂教学的十期、学校为基础的正念计划。重点是四年级至九年级学生的心理健康。初级研究人群由高危学生组成,所有学生作为二级研究人群。我们还研究了干预效果是否会因性别和年级而改变。在2019-2020年(COVID-19期间)的一项全国性聚类随机试验中,学校按1:1随机分为干预组(54所学校、97名教师、836名学生,其中包括186名高危学生)或照常教学组(56所学校、94名教师、892名学生,其中包括165名高危学生)。在基线、5个月和8个月收集了13项有效的心理健康自我报告措施,以优势和困难问卷总困难评分作为主要结果。意向治疗分析使用混合效应线性回归模型和自举进行。随访数据来自25所干预学校(605名学生,包括129名高危学生)和28所照旧教学学校(745名学生,包括143名高危学生)。在有风险的学生中,8个月时总困难评分的Cohen’s d为0.05 (95% CI -0.29至0.40),在整个研究人群中没有观察到统计学上显著的影响。二次分析表明,干预导致了感知到的多动/注意力不集中的增加——尤其是在男孩和低年级学生中——以及高危学生中自我评估的健康状况较差。为了更深入地了解基于学校的正念干预的机制和忠实地实施这些干预的关键因素,需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mindfulness in the school curriculum? A nationwide cluster-randomized trial of the effectiveness of implementing a mindfulness-based intervention for 9–16-year-olds students in Danish elementary schools
This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a teacher-training program for integrating a ten-session, school-based mindfulness program into regular classroom instruction in Danish elementary schools. The focus was on the mental health of students in grades 4 to 9. The primary study population comprised at-risk students, with the total students serving as a secondary study population. We also examined whether intervention effects were modified by sex and grade.
In a nationwide cluster-randomized trial in 2019–2020 (during COVID-19), schools were randomized 1:1 to either the intervention (54 schools, 97 teachers, 836 students, including 186 at-risk students) or teaching as usual (56 schools, 94 teachers, 892 students, including 165 at-risk students). Thirteen validated self-report measures of mental health were collected at baseline, five, and eight months, with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Total Difficulties Score as the primary outcome. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed using mixed-effects linear regression models and bootstrapping.
Follow-up data were obtained from 25 intervention schools (605 students, including 129 at-risk) and 28 teaching-as-usual schools (745 students, including 143 at-risk). Among at-risk students, Cohen's d for the Total Difficulties score at eight months was 0.05 (95 % CI -0.29 to 0.40), and no statistically significant effect was observed in the total study population.
Secondary analyses indicated that the intervention led to increased perceived hyperactivity/inattention—particularly among boys and younger students—and poorer self-rated health among at-risk students.
A deeper understanding of the mechanisms in school-based mindfulness-based interventionss and key factors for implementing them with fidelity requires further investigation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Science & Medicine
Social Science & Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
762
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Social Science & Medicine provides an international and interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination of social science research on health. We publish original research articles (both empirical and theoretical), reviews, position papers and commentaries on health issues, to inform current research, policy and practice in all areas of common interest to social scientists, health practitioners, and policy makers. The journal publishes material relevant to any aspect of health from a wide range of social science disciplines (anthropology, economics, epidemiology, geography, policy, psychology, and sociology), and material relevant to the social sciences from any of the professions concerned with physical and mental health, health care, clinical practice, and health policy and organization. We encourage material which is of general interest to an international readership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信