MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How do individuals with spinal cord injury practice mindfulness? Barriers & facilitators to practicing mindfulness and considerations for tailoring programs

2025· article· en· W7102417950 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuee-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessThematic analysisQualitative researchPsychological interventionSpinal cord injuryMental healthRehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study aims to understand how individuals with SCI experience and participate in mindfulness, including identifying barriers and facilitators to participation. A qualitative descriptive approach following the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist was implemented. Participants partook in one-on-one telephone interviews which explored their experiences with mindfulness. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo. 22 participants from the United States and Canada participated. The majority were female, between 28–67 years old. Two main themes and six sub-themes were identified. The first main theme related to perceived experiences and anticipated benefits related to practicing mindfulness (e.g. reduced muscle tension, reduced stress, social connection). Sub-themes included: physical benefits, mental benefits, social/interpersonal benefits, and mind and/or body awareness. The second main theme related to perceived barriers to practicing mindfulness (e.g. misconceptions of mindfulness, language and cues) and mitigating strategies (e.g. education, permissive rather than prescriptive language). Sub-themes included awareness and understanding of mindfulness and accessibility. Our study provides evidence for content and language that could be tailored specifically for individuals with SCI, and points to the need for general education and awareness for what mindfulness is and is not. Mindfulness based interventions (MBIs) have potentially positive influences on physical, mental, social and mind and/or body awareness in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI).Findings from this and similar studies can be used to develop or tailor a MBI for individuals with SCI.Implementation of MBIs can significantly enhance rehabilitation by improving psychological well-being, supporting pain management, and promoting greater engagement in therapy, while also encouraging a more holistic, patient-centered approach to clinical practice. Mindfulness based interventions (MBIs) have potentially positive influences on physical, mental, social and mind and/or body awareness in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Findings from this and similar studies can be used to develop or tailor a MBI for individuals with SCI. Implementation of MBIs can significantly enhance rehabilitation by improving psychological well-being, supporting pain management, and promoting greater engagement in therapy, while also encouraging a more holistic, patient-centered approach to clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuee-space (Manchester Metropolitan University)Same topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207