Ema Štánerová , Veronika Zelenayová , Jakub Rajčáni
{"title":"标准治疗中癌症患者的正念干预:对抑郁、焦虑和生活质量影响的荟萃分析","authors":"Ema Štánerová , Veronika Zelenayová , Jakub Rajčáni","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychores.2025.112312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Mindfulness interventions are indicated to be effective in reducing psychological symptoms faced by patients with cancer. However, there is a lack of revised evidence on their effectiveness during the active treatment phase. To address this research gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials with adult patients written in English, published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Scopus databases up to July 25, 2023. Studies with participants who completed oncological treatment more than 6 months before inclusion in the study were excluded. We calculated moderate effects on quality of life (12 studies with 1124 participants; SMD = 0.50; 95 % CI [0.33, 0.67]), depression (19 studies with 1586 participants; SMD = −0.60; 95 % CI [−0.79; −0.41]) and anxiety (20 studies with 1542 participants; SMD = −0.64; 95 % CI [−0.83, −0.46]), but with considerable heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that effectiveness differed for distinct types of intervention, but not for different cancer diagnoses. The overall quality of evidence (GRADE) was low mainly due to unexplained heterogeneity and risk of bias in most studies. Our findings highlight the importance of thoroughly examining sources of heterogeneity and enhancing methodological transparency in primary studies within oncology populations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50074,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychosomatic Research","volume":"196 ","pages":"Article 112312"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mindfulness-based interventions for cancer patients in standard treatment: A meta-analysis of effects on depression, anxiety, and quality of life\",\"authors\":\"Ema Štánerová , Veronika Zelenayová , Jakub Rajčáni\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpsychores.2025.112312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Mindfulness interventions are indicated to be effective in reducing psychological symptoms faced by patients with cancer. However, there is a lack of revised evidence on their effectiveness during the active treatment phase. To address this research gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials with adult patients written in English, published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Scopus databases up to July 25, 2023. Studies with participants who completed oncological treatment more than 6 months before inclusion in the study were excluded. We calculated moderate effects on quality of life (12 studies with 1124 participants; SMD = 0.50; 95 % CI [0.33, 0.67]), depression (19 studies with 1586 participants; SMD = −0.60; 95 % CI [−0.79; −0.41]) and anxiety (20 studies with 1542 participants; SMD = −0.64; 95 % CI [−0.83, −0.46]), but with considerable heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that effectiveness differed for distinct types of intervention, but not for different cancer diagnoses. The overall quality of evidence (GRADE) was low mainly due to unexplained heterogeneity and risk of bias in most studies. Our findings highlight the importance of thoroughly examining sources of heterogeneity and enhancing methodological transparency in primary studies within oncology populations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychosomatic Research\",\"volume\":\"196 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112312\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychosomatic Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399925002764\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychosomatic Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399925002764","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
正念干预在减少癌症患者面临的心理症状方面是有效的。然而,在积极治疗阶段缺乏关于其有效性的修订证据。为了解决这一研究空白,我们对成人患者的对照临床试验进行了荟萃分析,这些试验以英文撰写,发表于PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO和Scopus数据库,截止到2023年7月25日。受试者在纳入研究前完成肿瘤治疗超过6个月的研究被排除在外。我们计算了对生活质量的中等影响(12项研究,1124名参与者;smd = 0.50;95% CI[0.33, 0.67]),抑郁症(19项研究,1586名受试者;smd =−0.60;95% ci[−0.79;−0.41])和焦虑(20项研究,1542名受试者;smd =−0.64;95% CI[−0.83,−0.46]),但存在相当大的异质性。亚组分析显示,不同类型的干预措施效果不同,但对不同的癌症诊断没有影响。总体证据质量(GRADE)较低,主要是由于大多数研究存在无法解释的异质性和偏倚风险。我们的研究结果强调了在肿瘤人群的初级研究中彻底检查异质性来源和提高方法透明度的重要性。
Mindfulness-based interventions for cancer patients in standard treatment: A meta-analysis of effects on depression, anxiety, and quality of life
Mindfulness interventions are indicated to be effective in reducing psychological symptoms faced by patients with cancer. However, there is a lack of revised evidence on their effectiveness during the active treatment phase. To address this research gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials with adult patients written in English, published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Scopus databases up to July 25, 2023. Studies with participants who completed oncological treatment more than 6 months before inclusion in the study were excluded. We calculated moderate effects on quality of life (12 studies with 1124 participants; SMD = 0.50; 95 % CI [0.33, 0.67]), depression (19 studies with 1586 participants; SMD = −0.60; 95 % CI [−0.79; −0.41]) and anxiety (20 studies with 1542 participants; SMD = −0.64; 95 % CI [−0.83, −0.46]), but with considerable heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that effectiveness differed for distinct types of intervention, but not for different cancer diagnoses. The overall quality of evidence (GRADE) was low mainly due to unexplained heterogeneity and risk of bias in most studies. Our findings highlight the importance of thoroughly examining sources of heterogeneity and enhancing methodological transparency in primary studies within oncology populations.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Psychosomatic Research is a multidisciplinary research journal covering all aspects of the relationships between psychology and medicine. The scope is broad and ranges from basic human biological and psychological research to evaluations of treatment and services. Papers will normally be concerned with illness or patients rather than studies of healthy populations. Studies concerning special populations, such as the elderly and children and adolescents, are welcome. In addition to peer-reviewed original papers, the journal publishes editorials, reviews, and other papers related to the journal''s aims.