Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions

Stephanie Coronado-Montoya, Alexander W. Levis, Linda Kwakkenbos, Russell J. Steele, Erick Turner, Brett D. Thombs

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: A large proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials report statistically significant results, even in the context of very low statistical power. The objective of the present study was to characterize the reporting of "positive" results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. We also assessed mindfulness-based therapy trial registrations for indications of possible reporting bias and reviewed recent systematic reviews and metaanalyses to determine whether reporting biases were identified. Methods: CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. The number of positive trials was described and compared to the number that might be expected if mindfulness-based therapy were similarly effective compared to individual therapy for depression. Trial registries were searched for mindfulness-based therapy registrations. CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS were also searched for mindfulness-based therapy systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Results: 108 (87%) of 124 published trials reported ≥1 positive outcome in the abstract, and 109 (88%) concluded that mindfulness-based therapy was effective, 1.6 times greater than the expected number of positive trials based on effect size d = 0.55 (expected number positive trials = 65.7). Of 21 trial registrations, 13 (62%) remained unpublished 30 months post-trial completion. No trial registrations adequately specified a single primary outcome measure with time of assessment. None of 36 systematic reviews and meta-analyses concluded that effect estimates were overestimated due to reporting biases. Conclusions: The proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials with statistically significant results may overstate what would occur in practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere0153220
JournalPLoS One
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2016

Fingerprint

Mindfulness
mental health
Mental Health
Randomized Controlled Trials
Health
therapeutics
systematic review
Therapeutics
MEDLINE
Meta-Analysis
Registries
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases
Depression

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions. / Coronado-Montoya, Stephanie; Levis, Alexander W.; Kwakkenbos, Linda; Steele, Russell J.; Turner, Erick; Thombs, Brett D.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 11, No. 4, e0153220, 01.04.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Coronado-Montoya, Stephanie ; Levis, Alexander W. ; Kwakkenbos, Linda ; Steele, Russell J. ; Turner, Erick ; Thombs, Brett D. / Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions. In: PLoS One. 2016 ; Vol. 11, No. 4.
@article{c18463f2a3284a1bbc251a3ab265a676,
title = "Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions",
abstract = "Background: A large proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials report statistically significant results, even in the context of very low statistical power. The objective of the present study was to characterize the reporting of {"}positive{"} results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. We also assessed mindfulness-based therapy trial registrations for indications of possible reporting bias and reviewed recent systematic reviews and metaanalyses to determine whether reporting biases were identified. Methods: CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. The number of positive trials was described and compared to the number that might be expected if mindfulness-based therapy were similarly effective compared to individual therapy for depression. Trial registries were searched for mindfulness-based therapy registrations. CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS were also searched for mindfulness-based therapy systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Results: 108 (87{\%}) of 124 published trials reported ≥1 positive outcome in the abstract, and 109 (88{\%}) concluded that mindfulness-based therapy was effective, 1.6 times greater than the expected number of positive trials based on effect size d = 0.55 (expected number positive trials = 65.7). Of 21 trial registrations, 13 (62{\%}) remained unpublished 30 months post-trial completion. No trial registrations adequately specified a single primary outcome measure with time of assessment. None of 36 systematic reviews and meta-analyses concluded that effect estimates were overestimated due to reporting biases. Conclusions: The proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials with statistically significant results may overstate what would occur in practice.",
author = "Stephanie Coronado-Montoya and Levis, {Alexander W.} and Linda Kwakkenbos and Steele, {Russell J.} and Erick Turner and Thombs, {Brett D.}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0153220",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions

AU - Coronado-Montoya, Stephanie

AU - Levis, Alexander W.

AU - Kwakkenbos, Linda

AU - Steele, Russell J.

AU - Turner, Erick

AU - Thombs, Brett D.

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - Background: A large proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials report statistically significant results, even in the context of very low statistical power. The objective of the present study was to characterize the reporting of "positive" results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. We also assessed mindfulness-based therapy trial registrations for indications of possible reporting bias and reviewed recent systematic reviews and metaanalyses to determine whether reporting biases were identified. Methods: CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. The number of positive trials was described and compared to the number that might be expected if mindfulness-based therapy were similarly effective compared to individual therapy for depression. Trial registries were searched for mindfulness-based therapy registrations. CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS were also searched for mindfulness-based therapy systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Results: 108 (87%) of 124 published trials reported ≥1 positive outcome in the abstract, and 109 (88%) concluded that mindfulness-based therapy was effective, 1.6 times greater than the expected number of positive trials based on effect size d = 0.55 (expected number positive trials = 65.7). Of 21 trial registrations, 13 (62%) remained unpublished 30 months post-trial completion. No trial registrations adequately specified a single primary outcome measure with time of assessment. None of 36 systematic reviews and meta-analyses concluded that effect estimates were overestimated due to reporting biases. Conclusions: The proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials with statistically significant results may overstate what would occur in practice.

AB - Background: A large proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials report statistically significant results, even in the context of very low statistical power. The objective of the present study was to characterize the reporting of "positive" results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. We also assessed mindfulness-based therapy trial registrations for indications of possible reporting bias and reviewed recent systematic reviews and metaanalyses to determine whether reporting biases were identified. Methods: CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. The number of positive trials was described and compared to the number that might be expected if mindfulness-based therapy were similarly effective compared to individual therapy for depression. Trial registries were searched for mindfulness-based therapy registrations. CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS were also searched for mindfulness-based therapy systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Results: 108 (87%) of 124 published trials reported ≥1 positive outcome in the abstract, and 109 (88%) concluded that mindfulness-based therapy was effective, 1.6 times greater than the expected number of positive trials based on effect size d = 0.55 (expected number positive trials = 65.7). Of 21 trial registrations, 13 (62%) remained unpublished 30 months post-trial completion. No trial registrations adequately specified a single primary outcome measure with time of assessment. None of 36 systematic reviews and meta-analyses concluded that effect estimates were overestimated due to reporting biases. Conclusions: The proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials with statistically significant results may overstate what would occur in practice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84963776240&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84963776240&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0153220

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0153220

M3 - Article

C2 - 27058355

AN - SCOPUS:84963776240

VL - 11

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 4

M1 - e0153220

ER -