Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression, Taking It Further (MBCT-D-TiF): An Assessment of an Intervention Development Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) reduces depression relapse, yet graduates have expressed a need for structured guidance post-program to maintain mindfulness practice and sustain benefits. To address this, we created MBCT for Depression-Taking it Further (MBCT-D-TiF). Objective: To refine and pilot test feasibility and acceptability of MBCT-D-TiF. Methods: We collected qualitative focus group data to inform refinements and quantitative data to pilot test feasibility and acceptability of MBCT-D-TiF. In round one, participants received MBCT-D-TiF (n = 14), consisting of 4 weekly and then monthly sessions delivered via group videoconferencing. In round two (n = 20), participants were randomized 1:1 to MBCT-D-TiF or waitlist control. Surveys were completed at baseline, 1 and 4 months by all participants. We explored participants' experiences with MBCT-D-TiF in two focus groups (n = 7 in each) conducted via videoconferencing. We used descriptive statistics and mixed linear models to analyze quantitative data and thematic content analysis to analyze qualitative data. Results: MBCT-D-TiF participants (n = 25) attended all weekly sessions (100%) and at least 75% of the monthly sessions (76%); found the weekly sessions very or extremely helpful (77.1%), and the monthly sessions very or extremely helpful (66.7%). The following themes emerged: (1) the importance of the group for participants' social connection, support, and practice community that enhanced their meditative experience, helped improve their mental health, and facilitated accountability; (2) MBCT-D-TiF provided mental health benefits, including tools to lessen the negative impact of depression and anxiety, increase connections to the world, and enhance positive experiences; (3) participants' home practices were reinvigorated during the weekly MBCT-D-TiF sessions, but fell short of their goals thereafter. Conclusion: MBCT-D-TiF was well attended and rated very or extremely helpful by most participants, supporting its feasibility and acceptability. Qualitative data showed that additional steps to help participants sustain home practice are needed, offering a target for refinement and further testing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".