Relationship Between Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction and Immune Function in Cancer and HIV/AIDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Chronic stress is widespread, and is detrimental to immune functioning and to overall physical and emotional health. These effects may be potentiated in patients with chronic illness, as high levels of chronic stress are common in this population. Numerous studies support the efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) in improving psychological functioning. If a strong relationship is found between MBSR and immune function, then MBSR may be implemented as a strategy to improve immune functioning and overall well-being. Methods: In the present review paper, the relationship between MBSR and immune function is evaluated. Empirical studies measuring immune markers as they relate to a standard MBSR intervention were reviewed. Relevant articles primarily involved patients with cancer or HIV. Therefore, the associations of immune measures with psychological distress are discussed, with an emphasis on patients with these conditions. A psychoneuroimmunological (PNI) framework was utilized to propose a mechanism for the relationship between MBSR and immune function. Results: Overall, the findings support a positive relationship between MBSR intervention and beneficial immunological outcomes. Variability in immune measures assessed across studies precludes pooling data to develop more conclusive results. Conclusions: MBSR has been shown to consistently improve emotional functioning and quality of life, and these effects appear to facilitate immune function.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".