A recent article co-authored by Center for Healthy Minds alumnus and collaborator Simon Goldberg is putting the spotlight on the need for more rigorous research into mindfulness-based interventions.
The paper, “Is mindfulness research methodology improving over time? A systematic review,” recently appeared in the open-access journal PLOS One.
The report notes that in recent decades there has been an explosion in mindfulness-based interventions and research on these practices. Much of this work started with mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) based on Buddhist contemplative practices and expanded to mindfulness-based efforts to target various psychiatric and medical conditions. In general, there is evidence that these various interventions show positive results.
Nonetheless, the authors explain that “concerns have continually been raised regarding the methodological quality of this body of research.”
The article adds: “Despite an exponential growth in research on mindfulness-based interventions, the body of scientific evidence supporting these treatments has been criticized for being of poor methodological quality.”
Goldberg and his colleagues examined six methodological features that have been recommended in criticisms of mindfulness research: active control conditions; larger sample sizes; longer follow-up assessment; treatment fidelity assessment; reporting of instructor training; and reporting of intent to treat samples.