2014
DOI: 10.1097/ajp.0b013e318287a1dc
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy for the Treatment of Headache Pain

Abstract: This study empirically examined MBCT for the treatment of headache pain. Results indicated that MBCT is a feasible, tolerable, acceptable, and potentially efficacious intervention for patients with headache pain. This study provides a research base for future RCTs comparing MBCT to attention control, and future comparative effectiveness studies of MBCT and cognitive-behavioral therapy.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
123
1
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 106 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
8
123
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Seven studies obtained a "good" quality rating Fogarty et al, 2015;Ljotsson, Falk, et al, 2010;Parra-Delgado and Latorre-Postigo, 2013;Zautra et al, 2008). Ten studies were judged to be of fair quality, primarily due to being unclear in some aspects of the methods (Cash et al, 2015;Davis and Zautra, 2013;Day et al, 2014;Dowd et al, 2015;Gaylord et al, 2011;la Cour and Petersen, 2015;Morone, Greco, and Weiner, 2008;Wells et al, 2014). Eleven studies were judged to be poor; eight of these were primarily due to issues with completeness of reporting outcome data, such as inadequate or missing ITT analysis or less than 80-percent follow-up Brown and Jones, 2013;Cathcart et al, 2014;Esmer et al, 2010;Meize-Grochowski et al, 2015;Morone et al, 2009;Omidi and Zargar, 2014;PlewsOgan et al, 2005).…”
Section: Study Quality/risk Of Bias For Individual Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Seven studies obtained a "good" quality rating Fogarty et al, 2015;Ljotsson, Falk, et al, 2010;Parra-Delgado and Latorre-Postigo, 2013;Zautra et al, 2008). Ten studies were judged to be of fair quality, primarily due to being unclear in some aspects of the methods (Cash et al, 2015;Davis and Zautra, 2013;Day et al, 2014;Dowd et al, 2015;Gaylord et al, 2011;la Cour and Petersen, 2015;Morone, Greco, and Weiner, 2008;Wells et al, 2014). Eleven studies were judged to be poor; eight of these were primarily due to issues with completeness of reporting outcome data, such as inadequate or missing ITT analysis or less than 80-percent follow-up Brown and Jones, 2013;Cathcart et al, 2014;Esmer et al, 2010;Meize-Grochowski et al, 2015;Morone et al, 2009;Omidi and Zargar, 2014;PlewsOgan et al, 2005).…”
Section: Study Quality/risk Of Bias For Individual Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pain scales and comparators varied from study to study (Astin et al, 2000;Brown and Jones, 2013;Cash et al, 2015;Cathcart et al, 2014;Davis and Zautra, 2013;Day et al, 2014;Dowd et al, 2015;Esmer et al, 2010;la Cour and Petersen, 2015;Meize-Grochowski et al, 2015;Morone, Greco, and Weiner, 2008;Morone et al, 2009;Omidi and Zargar, 2014;Plews-Ogan et al, 2005;Teixeira, 2010;Wells et al, 2014;Zautra et al, 2008;Parra-Delgado and Latorre-Postigo, 2013;Rahmani and Talepasand, 2015;Gaylord et al, 2011;Ljotsson, Falk, et al, 2010). The median follow-up time was 12 weeks, with a range of four to 60 weeks.…”
Section: Chronic Pain Treatment Response Standardized Mean Differencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations