Effects of mindfulness-based interventions on perceived stress among non-clinical adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Anisha Rajan, Mahendra Kumar, Pranav Raj P
Npj mental health research February 3, 2026 DOI: 10.1038/s44184-026-00188-4 via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractA systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials involving 1,641 non-clinical adults found that mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) significantly reduce perceived stress compared to control conditions. At baseline, stress levels were similar between groups. After the intervention, MBI participants reported lower perceived stress, with a moderate-to-large effect size. Within-group improvements were substantial for MBI groups, while control groups showed only marginal changes. The stress-reducing effect was consistent across different regions and delivery methods, with larger effects for indirect interventions. No significant moderators were identified, and the results were robust with minimal publication bias. These findings support MBIs as effective, scalable strategies for stress reduction in non-clinical adults.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Systematic review and meta-analysis Randomized Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 1,641 |
| Population | Non-clinical adults |
| Intervention | Mindfulness-based interventions |
| Citations | 1 |
| Key finding | Mindfulness-based interventions significantly reduce perceived stress in non-clinical adults compared to control conditions, with a moderate-to-large effect size and consistent effects across regions and delivery modalities. |
Abstract
Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) are recognised as effective psychosocial strategies for managing stress. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published up to August 2025 across the Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, EBSCO and Google Scholar following the PRISMA guidelines. Seventeen randomised controlled trials (n = 1,641) met the inclusion criteria. Baseline stress did not differ between MBI and control groups (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI = -0.07 to 0.36, p = 0.18). Post-intervention, MBIs were associated with significantly lower perceived stress (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI = -0.72 to -0.33, p < 0.00001). Within-group analyses indicated substantial reductions among MBI participants (SMD = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.23, p < 0.00001), whereas controls showed only marginal changes (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.00 to 0.46, p = 0.05). Subgroup analyses confirmed effectiveness across regions and delivery modalities, with larger effects observed in indirect interventions (SMD = -0.676, p < 0.001). Meta-regression found no significant moderators, and sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness with minimal publication bias. Collectively, these results support MBIs as effective and scalable strategies for reducing perceived stress in non-clinical adults, highlighting the need for further evaluation of their effects on physiological stress markers.