Increased Mindfulness Is Related to Improved Stress and Mood Following Participation in a Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Program in Individuals With Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) has demonstrated efficacy for alleviating cancer-related distress. Although theorized to be the means by which people improve, it is yet to be determined whether outcomes are related to the development or enhancement of mindfulness among participants. This study examined the effect of participation in an MBSR program on levels of mindfulness in a heterogeneous sample of individuals with cancer, and if these changes were related to improvements in stress and mood outcomes. METHODS: In all, 268 individuals with cancer completed self-report assessments of stress and mood disturbances before and after participation in an 8-week MBSR program. Of these, 177 participants completed the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale and 91 participants completed the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, at both time points. RESULTS: Levels of mindfulness on both measures increased significantly over the course of the program. These were accompanied by significant reductions in mood disturbance (55%) and symptoms of stress (29%). Increases in mindfulness accounted for a significant percentage of the reductions in mood disturbance (21%) and symptoms of stress (14%). Being aware of the present moment and refraining from judging inner experience were the 2 most important mindfulness skills for improvements of psychological functioning among cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results add to a growing literature measuring the impact of mindfulness and its relationship to improved psychological health. Moreover, specific mindfulness skills may be important in supporting these improvements.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".