Effects of mindfulness-based interventions on cognition in people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cognitive impairment affects up to 65% of people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), undermining functional independence and quality of life. The objective of this study is to synthesize existing randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence on the effects of Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) on cognitive function in PwMS. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify RCTs assessing MBIs effects on cognitive functioning in PwMS. Using pre-defined criteria, two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and extracted data from included studies. Meta-analysis was performed, where possible, using a random effects model. Narrative synthesis was undertaken. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidance was followed. PROSPERO_ID:(CRD42021286429). Results: Twelve eligible RCTs were identified, n=700 PwMS. MBIs included both standardized and tailored interventions, in-person and virtually. A variety of measures of cognitive functioning were reported. Five studies (n=254 PwMS) were included in meta-analysis; pooled results suggested MBIs effectively improved scores on the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT)-2 (SMD=0.38; 95% CI 0.06-0.71; I2 63%; p=0.02), whereas improvements were of borderline significance on the PASAT-3 (SMD=0.32; 95% CI -0.01-0.64; I2 65%; p=0.06), and, although trending to positive, were statistically insignificant on the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (SMD=0.34; 95 CI -0.05-0.74; I2 0%; p=0.09) and Symbol Digits Modality Test (SMD=0.25; 95% CI -0.15-0.66; I2 0%; p=0.21). Conclusion: Preliminary findings in meta-analysis are inconsistent but suggest potential benefits from MBI training on cognitive functioning in PwMS. High quality RCTs are necessary to test more definitively the impact of MBIs on cognitive functioning in PwMS. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42021286429.
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 | 0.020 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".