The speed at which the body recovers is not the same as the speed at which the mind recovers. Depression for people who have experienced stroke has long been pointed to as a factor that determines the pace of rehabilitation. The research team at Qingdao Municipal Hospital (Qingdao Municipal Hospital) analyzed eight randomized controlled trials that examined how mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) affects depression after stroke, and the results were published in the international academic journal Frontiers in Psychiatry on May 8, 2026.
Eight trials from three countries, spanning 2012 to 2025
The studies included in the analysis are eight randomized controlled trials published between 2012 and 2025. Two were from the United States, one from Sweden, and five from China, with a total of 469 participants. Among them, 233 participants received the mindfulness program, while 236 were in the control group. The program was conducted mostly in group sessions once a week for eight weeks, while some lasted six weeks. The content includes body scan and mindfulness meditation, as well as gentle yoga—training people to recognize the present moment without judgment. The first author is Yongsheng Li, and the co-authors are Ying Sun and Shirong Bo.
Depression scores fell clearly
When the eight trials were combined, the mindfulness-program group had depression scores that were significantly lower than those of the control group (standardized mean difference SMD=-0.96, 95% confidence interval -1.35~-0.58, P〈0.001). The size is not small for a psychological intervention study.
However, the research team added a note that people should not take these figures at face value. Heterogeneity—the measure of variation in results across studies—was quite high at 71.0%, and the 95% prediction interval that takes future research into account included the possibility of no effect, spanning from -1.95 to 0.03.
Where and when it was done changed the results
In subgroup analyses, the results differed depending on the conditions. Studies conducted in Asia showed a clear effect (SMD=-1.27, P〈0.001), but the effect was not statistically significant in non-Asia regions (SMD=-0.31, P=0.17). The research team said it mentioned the possibility that differences in cultural context may have played a role, but there is no data yet that directly tests that.
It also varied by timing. When the program was started after the condition had stabilized, the effect was confirmed (SMD=-1.02, P〈0.001), but when it was started in the acute phase, it was not significant (SMD=-0.80, P=0.14). In other words, when the program that addresses the mind is introduced can change the results.
Evidence is rated as "low"
The research team assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as "low." Due to the nature of psychological-intervention studies, it is difficult to blind participants and assessors, so most of the original studies were judged to have a high risk of bias. The team cited large heterogeneity and the limited number of included studies—only eight—which reduces the precision of the estimates. The team also pointed out that most trials did not report long-term follow-up results.
In South Korea as well, efforts to introduce programs that deal with the mind in rehabilitation settings are continuing. This analysis shows the potential of such programs, while also leaving a reminder that the same results may not be obtained unless researchers design—together—when to apply the program and to whom.
For article inquiries: fare3041@naver.com
