Search alternatives:
significant size » significant side (Expand Search), significant shape (Expand Search), significant sex (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
size decrease » sizes decrease (Expand Search), size increase (Expand Search), size increased (Expand Search)
significant size » significant side (Expand Search), significant shape (Expand Search), significant sex (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
size decrease » sizes decrease (Expand Search), size increase (Expand Search), size increased (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
Study-related adverse events.
Published 2025“…We recorded 12 study-related, Grade 1–2 AEs and no serious AEs. In a linear mixed model analysis (LMM), the MBSR + PAP arm evidenced a significantly larger decrease in QIDS-SR-16 score than the MBSR-only arm from baseline to 2-weeks post-intervention (between-groups effect = 4.6, 95% CI [1.51, 7.70]; <i>p</i> = 0.008). …”
-
12
Study flow chart.
Published 2025“…We recorded 12 study-related, Grade 1–2 AEs and no serious AEs. In a linear mixed model analysis (LMM), the MBSR + PAP arm evidenced a significantly larger decrease in QIDS-SR-16 score than the MBSR-only arm from baseline to 2-weeks post-intervention (between-groups effect = 4.6, 95% CI [1.51, 7.70]; <i>p</i> = 0.008). …”
-
13
Study CONSORT diagram.
Published 2025“…We recorded 12 study-related, Grade 1–2 AEs and no serious AEs. In a linear mixed model analysis (LMM), the MBSR + PAP arm evidenced a significantly larger decrease in QIDS-SR-16 score than the MBSR-only arm from baseline to 2-weeks post-intervention (between-groups effect = 4.6, 95% CI [1.51, 7.70]; <i>p</i> = 0.008). …”
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20