| Title |
Mindfulness Meditation for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12160-016-9844-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lara Hilton, Susanne Hempel, Brett A. Ewing, Eric Apaydin, Lea Xenakis, Sydne Newberry, Ben Colaiaco, Alicia Ruelaz Maher, Roberta M. Shanman, Melony E. Sorbero, Margaret A. Maglione |
| Abstract |
Chronic pain patients increasingly seek treatment through mindfulness meditation. This study aims to synthesize evidence on efficacy and safety of mindfulness meditation interventions for the treatment of chronic pain in adults. We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Outcomes included pain, depression, quality of life, and analgesic use. Thirty-eight RCTs met inclusion criteria; seven reported on safety. We found low-quality evidence that mindfulness meditation is associated with a small decrease in pain compared with all types of controls in 30 RCTs. Statistically significant effects were also found for depression symptoms and quality of life. While mindfulness meditation improves pain and depression symptoms and quality of life, additional well-designed, rigorous, and large-scale RCTs are needed to decisively provide estimates of the efficacy of mindfulness meditation for chronic pain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 19% |
| United States | 7 | 13% |
| Canada | 5 | 9% |
| Spain | 4 | 8% |
| Italy | 2 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 40 | 75% |
| Scientists | 7 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,475 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1473 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 216 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 214 | 15% |
| Researcher | 127 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 124 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 94 | 6% |
| Other | 253 | 17% |
| Unknown | 447 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 322 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 197 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 151 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 70 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 50 | 3% |
| Other | 199 | 13% |
| Unknown | 486 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 637. 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 30 March 2024.
All research outputs
#35,042
of 25,718,113 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#2
of 1,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#659
of 329,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#1
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,718,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 329,762 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.