Mindfulness-Based Reduction Stress Reduction for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Depressive Symptoms: a Pilot Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : Despite their efficacy at controlling joint inflammation, current treatments of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) leave up to 40% of patients into non-remission. Non-remission, frequently due to persistently negative self-reported impact of RA, was found to be associated with significant persistent depressive symptoms 6-7 months after initiation of arthritis treatment. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) is proposed to improve depressive symptoms and RA-related clinical outcomes. To pave the way for an eventual randomized controlled trial, a feasibility and acceptability study of MBSR has been realized. Methods: A standardized 8-week MBSR program was offered to groups of patients with controlled inflammatory disease but high levels of depressive symptoms.Qualitative interviews based on a theoretical framework of acceptability were conducted. Change in depressive symptoms (CES-D tool), fatigue and pain (SF-36), anxiety (GAD-7), pain, disease activity (PtVAS and SDAI scores) was measured over a 6-month period. Results: 27 patients have been recruited (3 distinct MBSR groups). Factors leading to a higher rate of success in recruitment were identified. Despite the small sample, the intervention was found to have a clear impact on depressive symptoms (p=0.004), anxiety (p=0.005), and social functioning (from the SF-36; p=0.04). Patients reported that MBSR gave them the opportunity to control their reactions in face of stressful situations.Perceptions were almost uniformly positive towards MBSR, and most appear to have integrated some part of the intervention in their daily life. Conclusions: Although recruitment was challenging, a MBSR trial on depressed patients with controlled inflammatory disease was found acceptable and feasible within this population. Preliminary clinical results showed positive impacts of such intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".