Continuation Sessions of Mindfulness‐Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT‐C) vs. Treatment as Usual in Late‐Life Depression and Anxiety: An Open‐Label Extension Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is a novel treatment for depression. Our published randomized controlled trial shows that MBCT improves symptoms of late-life depression (LLD) and anxiety (LLA). We now examine whether continuation sessions of MBCT (MBCT-C) can prevent LLD/LLA symptom recurrence. METHODS/DESIGN: Following an 8-week MBCT intervention, we compared patients who attended open-label weekly 1-hour MBCT-C for another 26 weeks (n = 10) vs those who did not (n = 17) for change in depressive and anxiety symptoms. RESULTS: While there were no significant differences between groups on depressive or anxiety symptom severities between 8- and 34- weeks (Cohen's d = 0.045), we observed a small clinical effect of MBCT-C on symptoms of anxiety (d = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest that MBCT-C may be somewhat beneficial for symptoms of LLA, but not for LLD. Healthcare providers should consider what is clinically feasible before investing time and resources into MBCT-C in older adults with depression and/or anxiety.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".