Mindfulness and Psychosocial Symptoms in People with Cancer: Testing Rumination and Experiential Avoidance as Mediators, and Sex as a Moderator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: While Mindfulness-Based Interventions (MBIs) are evidenced to reduce common psychosocial symptoms experienced by people with cancer (PWC), few studies have tested their mechanisms. Additionally, studies have yet to assess sex assigned at birth as a moderator of the relationship between mindfulness and psychosocial symptoms through specified mediators. This study (1) explored the mediating role of rumination and experiential avoidance (EA) in the relationship between mindfulness and a range of psychosocial symptoms and (2) tested sex as a moderator of the mediation models. Methods: This cross-sectional study assessed baseline data from 134 participants recruited for a mindfulness app clinical trial. Validated patient reported outcome measures of trait mindfulness, rumination, experiential avoidance, depression, anxiety, FCR, and fatigue were collected. Structural Equation Modelling was employed in R. Results: Rumination was a significant partial mediator between mindfulness, depression and anxiety and FCR, but not fatigue. EA acted as a weak mediator from mindfulness to FCR only. Subgroup analyses found that rumination may be more important for females than males in the relationship between mindfulness and depression and anxiety. Conclusions: Rumination may be a stronger mediator than EA for anxiety, depression and FCR, and this may be particularly important for females. Findings may help MBI researchers and developers target potentially relevant mediators to maximize robust study design and intervention efficacy.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".