2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2016.03.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effectiveness of a school-based mindfulness program for transdiagnostic prevention in young adolescents

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

13
144
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 132 publications
(167 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
13
144
0
Order By: Relevance
“…usual curricular) and one study had a waitlist control group (Quach et al 2016). Three of these studies also examined the sustainability of the intervention effects, reporting 3-month follow-up (Johnson et al 2016;Sibinga et al 2013), and 6-and 12-month follow-up (Johnson et al 2017) effects. Of the remaining four non-randomised studies, two were pre-post design with a waitlist control group (Schonert-Reichl and Lawlor 2010; Viafora et al 2015) and two were pre-post without control group (Bernay et al 2016;Joyce et al 2010).…”
Section: Design and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…usual curricular) and one study had a waitlist control group (Quach et al 2016). Three of these studies also examined the sustainability of the intervention effects, reporting 3-month follow-up (Johnson et al 2016;Sibinga et al 2013), and 6-and 12-month follow-up (Johnson et al 2017) effects. Of the remaining four non-randomised studies, two were pre-post design with a waitlist control group (Schonert-Reichl and Lawlor 2010; Viafora et al 2015) and two were pre-post without control group (Bernay et al 2016;Joyce et al 2010).…”
Section: Design and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Four of these papers (Barnes et al 2004;Britton et al 2014;Sibinga et al 2013Sibinga et al , 2016 employed an active control (e.g. health education class), two papers (Johnson et al 2016(Johnson et al , 2017 used a control group (e.g. usual curricular) and one study had a waitlist control group (Quach et al 2016).…”
Section: Design and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations