Bach Xuan Tran1, Chloe Harijanto2, Giang Thu Vu3, Roger C M Ho4. 1. Institute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, 100000, Viet Nam; Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. Electronic address: bach@hmu.edu.vn. 2. Manchester Medical School, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom; Institute for Global Health Innovations, Duy Tan University, Da Nang, 50000, Viet Nam. 3. Center of Excellence in Evidence-based Medicine, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, 700000, Viet Nam. 4. Department of Psychological Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 119228, Singapore; Institute for Health Innovation and Technology (iHealthtech), National University of Singapore, Singapore, 119077, Singapore; Center of Excellence in Behavioral Medicine, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, 700000, Viet Nam.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Mind-body therapies (MBT) are a range of practices which improve well-being and have shown promising results in a variety of illness. To inform the application of MBT in health promotion, and intervention designs, we conducted a global review of publication growth and content analysis of studies examining the impacts of MBT on quality of life (QoL) of different patient groups. DESIGN: Data from 1990 to 2018 was collected from the Web of Science (WoS). They were analyzed with descriptive statistics (publication volume by year, citations, and countries). The development of research areas overtime was structured using Latent Dirichlet Allocation, and co-occurrence of keywords of titles, and abstracts. RESULTS: 3906 studies were obtained, with an exponential increase in recent years. Mindfulness, mental health, cancer, surgery, and QoL are common themes in the literature. Research has explored the efficacy, mechanism, and approaches to deliver MBT in both the general population and the patients. CONCLUSIONS: MBT has proven promising in a wide range of medical conditions, not only as a complementary therapy but also been incorporated into health services, especially for chronic diseases. By characterizing the trends in research productivity, and topics, we suggest robust adverse reporting, and guidelines for disease specific MBT should be improved. This global mapping of MBT studies also provides insight for future research, policy, and management direction.
OBJECTIVES: Mind-body therapies (MBT) are a range of practices which improve well-being and have shown promising results in a variety of illness. To inform the application of MBT in health promotion, and intervention designs, we conducted a global review of publication growth and content analysis of studies examining the impacts of MBT on quality of life (QoL) of different patient groups. DESIGN: Data from 1990 to 2018 was collected from the Web of Science (WoS). They were analyzed with descriptive statistics (publication volume by year, citations, and countries). The development of research areas overtime was structured using Latent Dirichlet Allocation, and co-occurrence of keywords of titles, and abstracts. RESULTS: 3906 studies were obtained, with an exponential increase in recent years. Mindfulness, mental health, cancer, surgery, and QoL are common themes in the literature. Research has explored the efficacy, mechanism, and approaches to deliver MBT in both the general population and the patients. CONCLUSIONS: MBT has proven promising in a wide range of medical conditions, not only as a complementary therapy but also been incorporated into health services, especially for chronic diseases. By characterizing the trends in research productivity, and topics, we suggest robust adverse reporting, and guidelines for disease specific MBT should be improved. This global mapping of MBT studies also provides insight for future research, policy, and management direction.
Authors: Giap Van Vu; Giang Hai Ha; Cuong Tat Nguyen; Giang Thu Vu; Hai Quang Pham; Carl A Latkin; Bach Xuan Tran; Roger C M Ho; Cyrus S H Ho Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 3.390