↓ Skip to main content

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depressed individuals improves suppression of irrelevant mental-sets

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
Title
Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depressed individuals improves suppression of irrelevant mental-sets
Published in
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00406-016-0746-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan Greenberg, Benjamin G. Shapero, David Mischoulon, Sara W. Lazar

Abstract

An impaired ability to suppress currently irrelevant mental-sets is a key cognitive deficit in depression. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) was specifically designed to help depressed individuals avoid getting caught in such irrelevant mental-sets. In the current study, a group assigned to MBCT plus treatment-as-usual (n = 22) exhibited significantly lower depression scores and greater improvements in irrelevant mental-set suppression compared to a wait-list plus treatment-as-usual (n = 18) group. Improvements in mental-set-suppression were associated with improvements in depression scores. Results provide the first evidence that MBCT can improve suppression of irrelevant mental-sets and that such improvements are associated with depressive alleviation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 125 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 18%
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 32 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Neuroscience 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 41 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 December 2018.
All research outputs
#5,084,377
of 24,690,130 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#307
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,304
of 318,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#3
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,690,130 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.