Question Mindfulness-based programmes (MBPs) are an increasingly popular approach to improving mental health in young people. Our previous meta-analysis suggested that MBPs show promising effectiveness, but highlighted a lack of high-quality, adequately powered randomised controlled trials (RCTs). This updated meta-analysis assesses the-state-of the-art of MBPs for young people in light of new studies. It explores MBP’s effectiveness in active vs passive controls; selective versus universal interventions; and studies that included follow-up. Study selection and analysis We searched for published and unpublished RCTs of MBPs with young people (<19 years) in PubMed Central, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, EThOS, EBSCO and Google Scholar. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, and standardised mean differences (Cohen’s d) were calculated. Findings Sixty-six RCTs, involving 20 138 participants (9552 receiving an MBP and 10 586 controls), were identified. Compared with passive controls, MBPs were effective in improving anxiety/stress, attention, executive functioning, and negative and social behaviour (d from 0.12 to 0.35). Compared against active controls, MBPs were more effective in reducing anxiety/stress and improving mindfulness (d=0.11 and 0.24, respectively). In studies with a follow-up, there were no significant positive effects of MBPs. No consistent pattern favoured MBPs as a universal versus selective intervention. Conclusions The enthusiasm for MBPs in youth has arguably run ahead of the evidence. While MBPs show promising results for some outcomes, in general, the evidence is of low quality and inconclusive. We discuss a conceptual model and the theory-driven innovation required to realise the potential of MBPs in supporting youth mental health. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.

中文翻译：

---

基于正念的项目是否能改善儿童和青少年的认知技能、行为和心理健康？随机对照试验的最新荟萃分析

基于正念的项目 (MBP) 是一种越来越流行的改善年轻人心理健康的方法。我们之前的荟萃分析表明，MBP 显示出有前途的有效性，但强调缺乏高质量、充分有力的随机对照试验 (RCT)。这项更新的荟萃分析根据新研究评估了年轻人 MBP 的最新技术水平。它探讨了 MBP 在主动与被动控制方面的有效性；选择性干预与普遍干预；以及包括随访在内的研究。研究选择和分析 我们在 PubMed Central、PsycINFO、Web of Science、EMBASE、ICTRP、ClinicalTrials.gov、EThOS、EBSCO 和 Google Scholar 中搜索了针对年轻人（<19 岁）的已发表和未发表的 MBP 随机对照试验。进行了随机效应荟萃分析，并计算标准化平均差 (Cohen's d)。结果 确定了 66 项随机对照试验，涉及 20138 名参与者（9552 名接受 MBP 和 10586 名对照）。与被动控制相比，MBPs 可有效改善焦虑/压力、注意力、执行功能以及消极和社交行为（d 从 0.12 到 0.35）。与主动控制相比，MBPs 在减少焦虑/压力和提高正念方面更有效（分别为 d=0.11 和 0.24）。在后续研究中，MBP 没有显着的积极作用。没有一致的模式支持 MBP 作为普遍干预与选择性干预。结论 可以说，年轻人对 MBP 的热情超过了证据。虽然 MBPs 对某些结果显示出有希望的结果，但一般来说，证据质量低且不确定。我们讨论了实现 MBP 在支持青年心理健康方面的潜力所需的概念模型和理论驱动的创新。与研究相关的所有数据都包含在文章中或作为在线补充信息上传。