The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Unwanted effects: Is there a negative side of meditation? A multicentre survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0183137 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ausiàs Cebolla, Marcelo Demarzo, Patricia Martins, Joaquim Soler, Javier Garcia-Campayo |
| Abstract |
Despite the long-term use and evidence-based efficacy of meditation and mindfulness-based interventions, there is still a lack of data about the possible unwanted effects (UEs) of these practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of UEs among meditation practitioners, considering moderating factors such as the type, frequency, and lifetime duration of the meditation practices. An online survey was developed and disseminated through several websites, such as Spanish-, English- and Portuguese-language scientific research portals related to mindfulness and meditation. After excluding people who did not answer the survey correctly or completely and those who had less than two months of meditation experience, a total of 342 people participated in the study. However, only 87 reported information about UEs. The majority of the practitioners were women from Spain who were married and had a University education level. Practices were more frequently informal, performed on a daily basis, and followed by focused attention (FA). Among the participants, 25.4% reported UEs, showing that severity varies considerably. The information requested indicated that most of the UEs were transitory and did not lead to discontinuing meditation practice or the need for medical assistance. They were more frequently reported in relation to individual practice, during focused attention meditation, and when practising for more than 20 minutes and alone. The practice of body awareness was associated with UEs to a lesser extent, whereas focused attention was associated more with UEs. This is the first large-scale, multi-cultural study on the UEs of meditation. Despite its limitations, this study suggests that UEs are prevalent and transitory and should be further studied. We recommend the use of standardized questionnaires to assess the UEs of meditation practices. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 7% |
| Japan | 4 | 5% |
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Argentina | 2 | 2% |
| India | 2 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Thailand | 1 | 1% |
| Finland | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 63 | 72% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 77 | 88% |
| Scientists | 6 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 373 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 373 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 55 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 44 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 44 | 12% |
| Researcher | 26 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 26 | 7% |
| Other | 67 | 18% |
| Unknown | 111 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 120 | 32% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 19 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 5% |
| Other | 41 | 11% |
| Unknown | 124 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 192. 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 26 July 2024.
All research outputs
#219,175
of 26,375,927 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#3,187
of 229,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,423
of 328,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#73
of 3,915 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,375,927 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 229,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 328,521 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,915 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 98% of its contemporaries.