MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2963956207 · doi:10.4073/csr.2017.5

Mindfulness‐based interventions for improving cognition, academic achievement, behavior, and socioemotional functioning of primary and secondary school students

2017· article· en· W2963956207 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brandy R. Maynard, Michael Solís, Veronica L. Miller, Kristen Esposito Brendel

Notice bibliographique

RevueCampbell Systematic Reviews · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSocioemotional selectivity theoryMindfulnessPsychological interventionPsychologyAcademic achievementCognitionAnxietyClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)Developmental psychologyPsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of school-based Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) on cognition, behavior, socio-emotional outcomes and academic achievement. The review summarizes 61 studies and synthesizes 35 studies, with a total of 6,207 student participants. MBIs have a small, statistically significant positive effect on cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes. But there is not a significant effect on behavioral and academic outcomes. There was little heterogeneity for all outcomes, besides behavioral outcomes, suggesting that the interventions produced similar results across studies on cognitive, socio-emotional and academic outcomes despite the interventions being quite diverse. Plain language summary Mindfulness-based interventions in schools have positive effects on cognitive and socio-emotional processes but do not improve behavior and academic achievement MBIs have a small, positive effect on cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes, but not a significant effect on behavioral and academic outcomes. The review in brief The use of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) in schools has been on the rise. Schools are using MBI's to reduce student stress and anxiety and improve socio-emotional competencies, student behavior and academic achievement. MBIs have small, positive effects on cognitive and socio-emotional processes but these effects were not seen for behavioral or academic outcomes. The studies are mostly of moderate to low quality. Therefore, further evidence from independent evaluators is needed to be able to evaluate the effectiveness of this type of intervention. What did this review study? With the diverse application and findings of positive effects of mindfulness practices with adults, as well as the growing popularity with the public, MBIs are increasingly being used with youth. Over the past several years, MBIs have received growing interest for use in schools to support socio-emotional development and improve behavior and academic achievement. This review examines the effects of school-based MBIs on cognitive, behavioral, socio-emotional and academic achievement outcomes with youth in a primary or secondary school setting. MBIs are interventions that use a mindfulness component, broadly defined as “paying attention in a particularly way: on purpose, in the present moment, non-judgmentally”, often with other components, such as yoga, cognitive-behavioral strategies, or relaxation skills training. What studies are included? Included studies used a randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental, single group pre-post test or single subject design and reported at least one of these outcomes: cognition, academic performance, behavior, socio-emotional, and physiological. Study populations include preschool, primary and secondary school students. A total of 61 studies are included in the review, but only the 35 randomized or quasi-experimental studies are used in the meta-analysis. Most of the studies were carried out in North America, and others in Asia, Europe and Canada. All interventions were conducted in a group format. Interventions ranged in duration (4-28 weeks) and number of sessions (6-125 sessions) and frequency of meetings (once every two weeks to five times a week). What is the aim of this review? This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of school-based MBIs on cognition, behavior, socio-emotional outcomes and academic achievement. The review summarizes 61 studies and synthesizes 35 studies, with a total of 6,207 student participants. What are the main results in this review? MBIs have a small, statistically significant positive effect on cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes. But there is not a significant effect on behavioral and academic outcomes. There was little heterogeneity for all outcomes, besides behavioral outcomes, suggesting that the interventions produced similar results across studies on cognitive, socio-emotional and academic outcomes despite the interventions being quite diverse. What do the findings in this review mean? Findings from this review indicate mixed effects of MBIs in schools. There is some indication that MBIs can improve cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes, but no support for improvement in behavior or academic achievement. Despite the growing support of MBIs for adults, youth may not benefit in the same ways or to the same extent as adults. While not well studied, anecdotal evidence indicates costs and adverse effects of these types of interventions that should be better studied and weighed against the small to no effects on different types of outcomes when considering adoption of MBIs in schools. These findings should be read with caution given the weakness of the evidence produced by the studies. The high risk of bias present in the studies means that further evidence is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this type of intervention. The evidence from this review urges caution in the widespread adoption of MBIs and encourages rigorous evaluation of the practice should schools choose to implement it. How up-to-date is this review? The review authors searched for studies published until May 2015. This Campbell systematic review was published in March 2017. Executive summary BACKGROUND Due to educational policy initiatives over the last two decades, school districts across the United States have placed more emphasis on improving academic standards and accountability. Indeed, children are spending between 20 to 25 hours per year on meeting federal, state and local school-district testing requirements (Hart et al., 2015). This increased emphasis on academic standards and high stakes testing has, at least in part, been blamed for the increasing levels of stress and anxiety children are experiencing (APA, 2009; Merkangas et al., 2010; Pope, 2010). In addition to changes in education policy requiring an increased emphasis on academic standards and accountability, schools are increasingly expected to attend to the social, emotional, and behavioral needs and problems of students. Given that as many as 13% to 20% children in the U.S. are experiencing one or more mental disorders (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013), schools are increasingly challenged to respond to the growing emotional and behavioral needs of their students. Moreover, socioemotional development and competencies have been linked to learning and academic achievement, and have thus become a target for school-based interventions as a means of improving learning and academic achievement (Durlak, Weisberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schhellinger, 2011; Eisenberg, Spinrade, & Eggum, 2010; Zins & Elias, 2006). One approach to supporting improvements in socioemotional development and competencies that has received growing interest for use in schools is mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs). Mindfulness is defined as “paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, nonjudgementally” (Zabat-Zinn, 1994, p. 4). Research suggests positive effects of MBIs for adults with chronic conditions, mental health diagnoses, psychiatric disorders, and stress (Chiesa, Calati, & Serretti, 2011; deVibe et al., 2012; Cramer, Haller, Lauche, & Dobos, 2012; Vollestad, B. Nielsen, & H. Nielsen, 2012. Moreover, studies suggest that mindfulness based practices may improve performance on a variety of socioemotional outcomes, including self-regulation, stress, and mood disturbance (Cheisa & Serretti, 2009; Regehr, Glancy, & Pitts, 2013). There has been increasing interest in MBIs with children and adolescents, and schools are often seen as a convenient setting to implement MBIs with children and youth. Some of the more popular MBIs used in schools are Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR; Kabat-Zinn, 1979; Bootzin & Stevens, 2005), Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy f

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,006
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,020

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,020
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,005
Bibliométrie0,0050,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,117
Tête enseignante GPT0,404
Écart entre enseignants0,287 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations156
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCampbell Systematic ReviewsMême sujetMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsTravaux en français237 207