Mindful Kangaroo Care: mindfulness intervention for mothers during skin-to-skin care: a randomized control pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Parents of babies admitted to the Newborn Intensive Care Unit (NICU) undergo considerable stress. There is evidence that mindfulness reduces stress in these parents. Kangaroo Care (KC) is practiced in NICUs across the world and is stress-relieving. Whether mindfulness practiced during KC in the NICU reduces parental distress has not yet been studied. The objective was to explore the feasibility and acceptability of teaching and practicing mindfulness during KC for mothers of premature babies. The objective was also to document preliminary outcomes of Mindful Kangaroo Care (MKC) on maternal stress, anxiety, depression, and mindful awareness. Methods In this pilot randomized controlled study, mothers of premature babies who were expected to stay in the NICU for at least four weeks were taught two mindfulness exercises to practice during KC and compared to mothers who received standard care with no mindfulness teaching. Mothers filled out stress, anxiety, depression and mindful awareness scales at recruitment and after four weeks. Acceptability and feasibility questionnaires were also completed. Results Fifteen mothers per group completed the study. The MKC group demonstrated a significant within-group reduction in anxiety (p = 0.003), depression (p = 0.02) and stress (p = 0.002), and a significant increase in both the curiosity (p = 0.008) and decentering (p = 0.01) scores of the Toronto Mindfulness Scale, all of which had medium to large effect sizes. Only the increases in curiosity and decentering were significant between groups. Fourteen mothers found the intervention acceptable, one neutral. Conclusion MKC was acceptable, feasible and led to a reduction in stress, anxiety and depression in mothers who practiced mindfulness exercises during KC.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".