Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy: A Guide for Schools

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, or MBCT, is a structured psychological course. It joins mindfulness practice with ideas from cognitive behavioural therapy. It was made to help adults with repeated depression see thoughts and feelings as passing events, rather than facts or commands.

This guide explains the research and gives teachers, SENCOs, designated safeguarding leads and school leaders a safe way to review a proposal.

MBCT sits within a wider set of ideas about learning and the mind. Our guide to fundamental theories of learning maps that wider field. The page on counselling theories sets out the right roles for therapy and school support.

Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy Explained

MBCT is an eight-session group course for people at risk of repeated depression. It joins mindfulness practice, lessons about thoughts and actions, guided talk and work at home. People learn to spot old patterns and take a new stance towards thoughts and feelings. The sessions form one course, not a loose set of ways to feel calm.

The first trial described MBCT as a way for adults who had recovered from recurrent major depression to disengage from thinking patterns activated by low mood (Teasdale et al., 2000). That population matters. The trial did not test a universal classroom lesson, primary-age breathing practice or teacher treatment for anxiety.

In MBCT, mindfulness means paying close attention to the present with curiosity and less quick judgement. The course also helps people spot links between mood, thoughts, feelings in the body and what they do. The aim is not to force a positive thought into place.

In this guide

• Why MBCT was developed
• How awareness and decentring work
• The structure of an MBCT programme
• MBCT, CBT, MBSR and school mindfulness compared
• What adult evidence shows
• What school evidence actually tests
• What the MYRIAD trial changed
• Whether teachers can deliver MBCT
• A safe school decision framework
• A worked school example
• Role-specific action
• SEND, culture, consent and equality
• Limitations and adverse responses
• Study and appraisal resources
• Frequently asked questions and references

‌

Why MBCT Was Developed

MBCT was made because depression can return after a person gets well. Its authors thought that a small drop in mood may bring back old loops of negative thought and rumination. They asked if people could learn to spot that shift and respond without being pulled back into the same loop.

The first course drew on cognitive therapy for depression and mindfulness-based stress reduction. It did not just add meditation to the task of testing negative thoughts. Through practice, thought and group talk, people learn to spot old habits and take a new stance towards them.

Teasdale and colleagues tested the approach with adults who had recurrent major depression and were currently recovered or in remission (2000). Later trials and reviews retained recurrent depression and relapse prevention as the central evidence base. Newer uses exist, but each adaptation needs its own evidence.

This history matters in schools because a familiar word can hide a change in what is being offered. A ten-minute focus task for a whole Year 8 class is not the adult course. A course adapted for an anxious child is not the same as a wellbeing lesson for all. Shared tasks do not prove a shared aim, dose, skill level or effect.

It also matters because depression is not a classroom label. Low mood, withdrawal, tiredness, poor concentration and missed work can have many causes. A teacher can notice, listen, record and use the school's support routes. They cannot diagnose recurrence or decide that MBCT is the indicated treatment.

‌

How MBCT Works

MBCT aims to change how a person relates to thoughts, feelings and signs from the body. A key idea is decentring. This means seeing a thought as an event in the mind, not at once as a fact, a command or the whole truth about the self. That pause leaves room for a chosen response.

Decentring differs from suppressing a thought. It also differs from proving that a thought is false. A person may notice, “the thought that I always fail is here”, then explore the experience without having to obey or remove it. Clinical teaching links this stance to patterns of low mood and relapse.

Research suggests that decentring may be one way the course helps, but it is hard to test one cause on its own. In an adult trial, gains in decentring went with less relapse in both MBCT and one other group (Moore et al., 2022). The process was not unique to MBCT. This supports careful wording, not a one-cause diagram.

MBCT also trains attention. People learn to notice the body, spot “automatic pilot”, attend to good and hard events, and plan what to do when warning signs arise. Group talk links the tasks to each person's own patterns. Work at home forms a large part of the standard course.

The phrase cognitive therapy can mislead school readers. MBCT grew within a cognitive-behavioural tradition, but its method is not simply to ask a learner for evidence against every negative thought. A classroom adult should not conduct therapeutic inquiry into a child's private beliefs without the role, competence, consent and support structure to do so.

Calm is not the only valid response. A focus on breath or the body can feel calm, neutral, hard or unsafe. A learner may need to keep their eyes open, look outwards, move, use another sense or opt out. Their response is useful information, not a score.

‌

Structure of an MBCT Programme

A standard MBCT course usually has eight weekly group sessions, with guided work between meetings. Sessions blend mindfulness, group talk, ideas about thoughts and actions, and plans for signs that depression may return. The timing and course can vary. A school should check the named manual and provider, not rely on the acronym.

Common practices include a body scan, mindful movement, sitting practice, awareness of breathing and a short breathing space. Participants explore automatic pilot, responses to difficulty and patterns that may signal relapse. The teacher guides inquiry after practice rather than announcing what the experience should have been.

This asks a lot of each person. It means a repeated focus on inner states, time outside the group and talk about how the tasks relate to distress. Oxford's training route shows the depth of skill expected from an MBCT teacher. It calls for study, personal practice, work under close review and sound ethics, not a one-day course.

Keeping to the course does not mean ignoring the person. A skilled provider checks if it may fit, explains the work and seeks informed agreement. They make access changes, watch for problems and work within the right care rules. Any change should keep the aim and safety steps, not just make each task shorter.

For children and young people, an age-based version may change the words, length, tasks and role of the family. It also needs the right care rules. MBCT-C is one named child version.

It is not proof that any adult task can be placed in a class. A school should ask for the exact course, age group and source of proof.

A useful test is whether the proposal can answer five nouns: programme, purpose, population, provider and pathway. If those are vague, the school does not yet know what it is approving.

‌

MBCT, CBT, MBSR and School Mindfulness Compared

Related approaches may share ways to focus or talk about thought, yet have a different aim, group and lead. The table stops research on one course being used to support another. It is a map, not a tool for choosing care. Each person still needs a skilled assessment.

There are overlaps. An MBCT course can include breathing awareness, and a class pause may also mention breath. That common ingredient does not make the interventions equivalent, just as writing in both a therapy session and an English lesson does not make the lesson psychotherapy.

The comparison also protects ordinary good teaching. A teacher can invite learners to notice readiness, offer a quiet start or make transitions predictable. Those choices may support access. They do not need clinical branding, a brain claim or a promise to prevent depression.

Our page on social-emotional learning covers the wider skills taught in that field. MBCT should not absorb it just because both may refer to thought or feeling. Our guide to metacognition in the classroom explains how learners plan, check and reflect on learning. That is not the same as therapy or decentring.

‌

Adult Evidence for Relapse Prevention

The main evidence is about adults with repeated major depression who are now well or partly well. It asks if MBCT cuts the risk of relapse when set against usual care, or works as well as other active options. It does not test class conduct, school results or prevention for all children.

The first trial across several sites involved 145 adults who had got well after repeated depression (Teasdale et al., 2000). The result helped set up the approach, mainly for people with several past bouts. It was an early trial, so it should be read with later work and not turned into one figure for all people.

Kuyken and colleagues (2016) later pooled data for each person from nine trials, with 1,329 adults in all. Within 60 weeks, the MBCT group had a lower risk of relapse than those given usual care. Results were much like those for other active forms of care. People with more symptoms left over may have gained more.

These findings support MBCT as one adult choice to help prevent relapse. They do not show that it is always better than medicine, CBT or another therapy. Who joined each trial, what people chose, their past bouts, symptoms left over, the other form of care and the length of follow-up all affect how we read the result.

NICE guidance for adult depression lists group CBT or MBCT as options in some cases where relapse is a risk (NICE, 2022). This advice sits within an assessment, a talk about choice, close checks and wider care. A school cannot take the name of a treatment while leaving that care route behind.

A good trial result does not reveal the exact cause. A trial may find a change in relapse without showing which part led to it. Time spent on tasks, group help, hopes, focus, decentring, plans and the skill of the leader may all work together. Claims about how it works need their own tests.

Adult research can still matter in a school. Staff may support a colleague, parent or older learner who is in skilled care. The school can link up that support, make fair changes and respect privacy. It should not become the source of treatment.

‌

Evidence for School Mindfulness Programmes

Most school research tests mindfulness-based courses, not clinical MBCT. The courses differ in length, age group, staff training, tasks, goals and the groups used for comparison. A review can find a mean result across studies. That mean must not hide the differences or be sold as proof for one therapy.

A review brought together 66 trials of mindfulness-based courses for children and young people (Dunning et al., 2022). The pooled studies found small mean gains in several areas. Gains were weaker when the other group also did an active task.

There were also signs that published work may give too bright a view of some results. Few studies checked if gains lasted.

This does not mean that every programme fails or succeeds by the pooled average. It means schools should ask what a named course achieved against a credible alternative, with which learners, for how long, and at what cost or burden.

A review checked the strength of school studies by research design and outcome (Phan et al., 2022). A later review by Marshall and colleagues (2025) rated named courses instead of treating the field as one product. Some had better support than others. The results did not all point the same way.

Hosan and colleagues (2022) frame the school choice around what is used, why it is used and when it may fit. That is more useful than asking if mindfulness works in the abstract. A school plan needs a clear problem, a named course and a fair test against what learners would get instead.

The latest broad AHRQ review also treats mindfulness work with young people as a varied field, not one form of care (Ivlev et al., 2026). Results differ by group, need, course and outcome. This backs the case for exact claims and checks over time.

School research should not become a promise about grades. A score for focus or wellbeing is not attainment. A short change after a course is not lifelong strength.

If a school wants to improve teaching, belonging, workload, its response to bullying or access, it should check those things direct. Mindfulness is not a stand-in for them.

Structural Learning's guide to strategies that promote learner wellbeing covers the wider school system. A mindfulness programme is one possible component, not the wellbeing strategy itself.

‌

Lessons from the MYRIAD Trial

MYRIAD was a large, strong UK test of school mindfulness training for all. The trial involved 85 schools and 8,376 learners aged 11 to 14. At one year, the course did not beat normal social and emotional lessons. This applied to risk of depression, social and emotional skills, conduct and wellbeing.

The programme involved ten lessons taught in schools. It was adapted from mindfulness-based approaches, but it was not clinical MBCT for adults with recurrent depression. Its null result therefore challenges promotional claims for universal school delivery, not the separate adult clinical indication.

The MYRIAD trial found no proof that the course was better at the main one-year test point (Kuyken et al., 2022). The comparison matters. Usual school support was not nothing.

Schools kept their normal social and emotional lessons. If both groups changed, that alone would not show that the course beat usual support.

A linked analysis found slightly worse scores for depression risk and wellbeing among learners already at risk of poor mental health (Montero-Marin et al., 2022). This was seen just after the course and at follow-up. The gaps were small and not judged to be of clinical weight. Even so, the authors said the course as used should not be offered to all.

That finding does not prove that mindfulness harms every at-risk learner. It does show why schools need genuine choice, suitability checks, neutral alternatives and monitoring. It also challenges the assumption that greater need automatically makes a universal internal-focus practice more suitable.

How a course is used also matters. Age, staff skill, context and whether learners take part can shape the result. Yet poor use cannot be blamed each time a trial goes against a claim. A course that works only in an ideal setting that has not been tested is not yet proven in real schools.

‌

Who Can Deliver MBCT

A classroom teacher should not claim to deliver clinical MBCT unless they have the right training, skill, close review and formal remit for that course and group. Reading a guide, using mindfulness at home or taking part in a short inset does not prove skill in clinical care.

A teacher has a vital but different role. They notice change, listen without forcing a child to speak, make learning easy to access and follow school safety steps. They share facts through agreed routes and work with families or trained staff. They do not probe a learner's private thoughts as therapy. Our guide to mental health in schools explains the wider support system.

Some schools train teachers to lead a named mindfulness course for all. That is still not clinical MBCT. Leaders should check the course, training, age range, research, oversight, safety steps, consent, choices and plan for distress.

The word teacher can also cause confusion. An MBCT teacher is a trained programme practitioner. A schoolteacher is an education professional. One person may hold both roles, but the second title does not confer the first, and clinical work still needs the right governance.

NICE says that therapy for depression in children and young people should be led by staff with the right level of skill in that form of care (NICE, 2019). They also need skill in child and youth mental health. The NICE care steps do not list class MBCT as a replacement for an assessment or treatment.

A brief classroom pause can still be sound. Keep its purpose modest, such as orienting before a transition. Offer an external-focus option, movement, eyes-open participation and a neutral alternative. Do not collect personal disclosures or claim that the routine treats anxiety or prevents depression.

‌

A Safe School Decision Framework

Before a school adopts a course, use six checks. They stop an appealing task from gaining health claims it has not earned. They also put consent, access and the plan for distress in place before the course starts.

1. Name the plan. Record the exact course and version, session length, tasks, materials and age range. Decide if it is clinical MBCT, a child version, a course for all at school or a brief class routine.
2. State the aim and group. Name the problem and who will take part. “Wellbeing” is too broad if the school has no clear measure, route for help or other choice.
3. Match the research. Ask if the study tested the same course, group, leader and result against a fair other option. Do not attach adult relapse research to a task for all at school.
4. Check skills and rules. Confirm training, oversight, safety, data care, complaints and routes to skilled help. Name who must respond if distress or a disclosure arises.
5. Plan consent and access. Explain the task in advance and provide a true opt-out with an equal choice. Plan for needs linked to the senses, speech, the body, culture, faith, trauma and health.
6. Review and stop. Record who took part, the load, unwanted effects, views from learners and families, how the course was used and the intended results. Set a review date and rules to adapt, stop or refer.

The framework does not approve a course. It makes the research and school rules clear so the right people can decide. Buying care, keeping children safe and the use of personal data may need expert advice beyond this guide.

‌

A Worked School Example

A secondary school starts a six-week mindfulness course in form time. The leaflet calls it MBCT and says it will reduce anxiety. Sam has mental-health support outside school. During a body scan with eyes closed, Sam looks distressed and asks to leave.

The case does not prove that Sam should never use mindfulness or that the programme harmed every learner. It shows that the school must respond to the actual experience, preserve care routes and correct an inaccurate programme claim.

It also shows why the distinction is practical. If staff believe they are delivering a proven therapy, they may interpret distress as a temporary hurdle and continue. If they recognise a school activity with uncertain individual effects, they are more likely to respect choice and seek the right expertise.

‌

Roles for Teachers, SENCOs, DSLs and Leaders

Each school role holds one distinct part of the safety net. Teachers protect access in class. SENCOs check barriers and changes. DSLs or pastoral leads respond to risk and disclosure.

Leaders oversee courses and data. Trained health staff assess needs and give care. Clear roles help people work together.

Classroom teachers explain any routine plainly, make participation genuinely optional and offer alternatives that do not mark a learner out. They avoid clinical claims, private cognitive inquiry and pressure to close eyes or remain still. They record observable facts and the learner's words.

SENCOs ask if the task creates barriers linked to speech, the senses, body signals, focus, movement, pain, breath, anxiety or past events. They help staff make changes and use the graduated approach where needs persist. Our guide to the SENCO role covers this wider process.

The page on special educational needs explains why one response to a mindfulness task cannot diagnose a need. The same act may stem from several demands. Fair access may need a different route.

DSLs and pastoral leaders ensure that distress, self-harm, suicidal thinking, abuse or other disclosures use the school's existing safeguarding and mental-health procedures. They do not rely on a mindfulness facilitator to hold risk outside those systems.

School leaders require a named course and clear aim. They also need a research note, named roles, proof of training, a consent route, an equal choice, a data plan and a stop rule. They check gains and burdens across groups, not just mean ratings or quiet conduct.

Qualified health staff or MBCT practitioners decide if clinical MBCT may fit, within their skill and service. When work with school is right, they share only what staff need to support the learner and keep private facts safe.

Governors or trustees can ask if treatment claims are true and if the spend fits the strength of the research. They can also check that worries or unwanted effects reach those who oversee the school, not only the person who backs the course.

‌

SEND, Culture, Consent and Equality

A mindfulness task that looks simple can ask a great deal of a learner. A focus on breath means noticing inner signs. Sitting still may add pain or make it harder to feel safe.

Silence and closed eyes can also affect safety. Figures of speech, group talk and long instructions can place a high load on speech and memory.

Some autistic or other neurodivergent learners may find signals from the body hard to name, very strong or hard to ignore. Others may value a set way to guide focus. The label alone does not predict the response. Ask what this person can access, finds useful and chooses.

Trauma and dissociation need great care. A focus on the body, stillness or less sight of the room can raise distress for some people. Staff must not make a learner disclose trauma to gain another choice. Safe design offers a choice before anyone has to say why.

Work on breath may feel hard for learners with a lung condition, panic signs or a recent illness. A set pose or movement may not be open to someone with pain, fatigue or a physical need. Looking at an object, listening to a sound, moving in a usual way or doing quiet schoolwork can be a fair choice.

Culture and faith also matter. A course may use secular health terms, yet its tasks can hold different meanings for families and learners. Clear facts and respectful talk are better than faith claims or a denial that the tasks have a past.

Consent where one person has more power needs more than a form. Learners must know what will happen, what data may be kept, who will see it and what other choices they have. Opting out must not reduce access, draw peer questions or be logged as poor conduct.

An equality check must look past attendance. Ask who opts out, who feels distress, who is removed, who is heard and who loses lesson time. A mean wellbeing score can hide an unfair burden.

Privacy matters because mental-health facts and a learner's response can be private. Keep only the least data needed for the stated aim. Control who can see it and set rules to keep or correct it. A journal must not become an unsafe store of personal facts.

‌

Limitations, Uncertainty and Adverse Responses

MBCT has a sound base of adult clinical research, but key limits remain. People know if they get a course of this kind. The other care in each trial can differ.

Those willing to join an intense course may differ from those who say no. Each result must stay tied to its study design and group.

The name can shift. Studies and public pages may use MBCT for the adult manual, a child version, a mixed mindfulness and CBT course, or a few borrowed tasks. A review cannot fix a vague label in the first study.

How it works is not settled. Decentring, mindfulness skills, self-kindness, practice, group help and relapse plans may all play a part. Moore and colleagues found that more decentring went with better adult results (Moore et al., 2022). The link was not unique to MBCT.

Results for young people vary. Dunning and colleagues (2022) found small pooled gains in some areas. The gains were weaker against an active other task, and there were signs of bias in what got published. MYRIAD warns against turning those means into one rule for all schools.

Unwanted effects are often not logged. A child health review of mind-body work found that 377 of 441 main studies did not state if an unwanted event had occurred or if safety had been checked (Lyszczyk et al., 2021). The review covered more than mindfulness, but this gap still matters.

An adult review of meditation and therapy found a range of unwanted effects, such as anxiety, depression and odd thought or sense events (Farias et al., 2020). Its pooled rate must not be applied to children or one school course. It does show why “no harm was reported” does not mean “harmless”.

Brief discomfort is not always harm. A hard moment is not always a sign of growth. Skilled staff explain what may happen, check how strong and long a response is, and look at daily life and risk.

They change or stop the task when needed. Schools should use the same care.

Good use cannot rescue every claim. Training and use as planned matter. Yet a course does not work just because its supporters say people should have joined in more.

Schools need research from real settings. They should also compare the course with gains made through usual school support.

School outcomes need school research. Less relapse in adults does not prove better attendance, conduct, grades or focus in class. If these are the goals, check them. Also check wellbeing, burden and fairness.

‌

MBCT Study Note and School Appraisal Resources

These resources turn research limits into school checks. Use the study note, two-page record and 12 cards for review or study. None is a therapy manual, symptom test or tool to choose care.

‌

Frequently Asked Questions

These answers keep the clinical and school boundaries concise. MBCT is a structured programme with an adult relapse-prevention evidence base. Related school programmes require their own evidence and governance. A brief classroom practice should keep a modest purpose and never borrow a treatment claim.

‌

Is MBCT the same as mindfulness?

No. Mindfulness describes a family of practices and qualities of attention. MBCT is a structured psychological programme that uses mindfulness practices within a cognitive-behavioural and relapse-prevention curriculum. Sharing an ingredient does not make every mindfulness activity MBCT.

‌

Is MBCT the same as CBT?

No. MBCT developed within a cognitive-behavioural tradition and shares attention to patterns among thought, feeling and behaviour. Its sustained mindfulness practice and emphasis on decentring are distinctive. CBT is itself a broad family of therapies, so exact programmes and indications matter.

‌

What is the structure of MBCT?

Standard MBCT is commonly taught as eight weekly group sessions with guided mindfulness practice, cognitive-behavioural learning, inquiry and substantial home practice. Programme versions vary. This description is not a self-delivery protocol, and competent teaching requires more than following a session list.

‌

Does MBCT prevent depression relapse?

Adult trials support MBCT as one relapse-prevention option for people with recurrent depression. A nine-trial individual-patient meta-analysis found lower relapse risk than usual care and comparable outcomes to active treatments within its study conditions (Kuyken et al., 2016). This does not predict every person's outcome.

‌

Does MBCT work in schools?

That question is too broad because most school studies test other mindfulness-based programmes. Reviews report mixed small average effects, while the large MYRIAD universal programme did not outperform usual provision at one year. Schools must examine the exact programme, population, provider and outcome.

‌

Can a teacher use MBCT techniques with a class?

A teacher should not claim to deliver MBCT or cognitive therapy without the relevant competence and authority. They may use modest, non-clinical attention or transition routines within school policy, with clear purpose, genuine choice, accessible alternatives and no treatment promise.

‌

What if a learner becomes distressed during mindfulness?

Stop pressuring the learner to continue, offer an ordinary grounding or exit option, check privately within role and follow pastoral, safeguarding or clinical routes as needed. Record facts and learner voice. Do not interpret distress as resistance or prescribe more practice.

‌

Should mindfulness be compulsory?

No. A school should provide advance information, a genuine opt-out and a neutral alternative that does not identify or penalise the learner. Choice is particularly important where internal focus, stillness, closed eyes, cultural meaning or prior experience may make the activity difficult.

‌

Further Reading and References

The references below support the claims made in this guide. Adult clinical studies, youth reviews, school trials and safety evidence remain separate in the prose because a correct citation does not authorise transfer to another population or programme.

1. Dunning, D., Tudor, K., Radley, L., Dalrymple, N., Funk, J., Vainre, M., Ford, T., Montero-Marin, J., Kuyken, W., & Dalgleish, T. (2022). Do mindfulness-based programmes improve the cognitive skills, behaviour and mental health of children and adolescents? An updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Evidence Based Mental Health, 25(3), 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2022-300464
2. Farias, M., Maraldi, E., Wallenkampf, K. C., & Lucchetti, G. (2020). Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation-based therapies: A systematic review. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 142(5), 374-393. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13225
3. Hosan, N. E., Smith, V., Strean, W. B., Sibinga, E. M. S., Punja, S., & Vohra, S. (2022). The what, why, and when of using mindfulness in schools: Best practices and guidance for educators and policymakers. Theory Into Practice, 61(4), 406-417. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2107822
4. Ivlev, I., Pappas, M., Cheney, T. P., Yu, Y., Selph, S. S., Dana, T., Carney, N. A., Coyne, L., Hedrick, L., Wilson, A., Hart, E. L., & Fu, R. (2026). Mindfulness-based interventions for well-being and mental health in children and adolescents. AHRQ Evidence-based Practice Center Systematic Review. https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPC_SR_MINDFULNESS
5. Kuyken, W., Ball, S., Crane, C., et al. (2022). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal school-based mindfulness training compared with normal school provision in reducing risk of mental health problems and promoting well-being in adolescence: The MYRIAD cluster randomised controlled trial. Evidence Based Mental Health, 25(3), 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300396
6. Kuyken, W., Warren, F. C., Taylor, R. S., et al. (2016). Efficacy of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy in prevention of depressive relapse: An individual patient data meta-analysis from randomized trials. JAMA Psychiatry, 73(6), 565-574. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.0076
7. Lyszczyk, M., Karkhaneh, M., Gladwin, K. K., Funabashi, M., Zorzela, L., & Vohra, S. (2021). Adverse events of mind-body interventions in children: A systematic review. Children, 8(5), 358. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8050358
8. Marshall, T., Farrar, J. T., Wilson, L. M., Taylor, S. L., George, M. W., Ghose, S. S., Cosgrove, L., & Patel, R. (2025). Mindfulness-based interventions in schools: Assessing the evidence base. Psychiatric Services, 76(3), 272-284. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20240027
9. Montero-Marin, J., Allwood, M., Ball, S., et al. (2022). School-based mindfulness training in early adolescence: What works, for whom and how in the MYRIAD trial. Evidence Based Mental Health, 25(3), 117-124. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2022-300439
10. Moore, M. T., Lau, M. A., Haigh, E. A. P., Willett, B. R., Bosma, C. M., & Fresco, D. M. (2022). Association between decentering and reductions in relapse/recurrence in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression in adults: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 90(2), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000718
11. Phan, M. L., Renshaw, T. L., Caramanico, J., et al. (2022). Mindfulness-based school interventions: A systematic review of outcome evidence quality by study design. Mindfulness, 13, 1591-1613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-022-01885-9
12. Teasdale, J. D., Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., Ridgeway, V. A., Soulsby, J. M., & Lau, M. A. (2000). Prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depression by mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(4), 615-623. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.68.4.615
13. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2019). Depression in children and young people: Identification and management, recommendations. NICE guideline NG134.
14. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2022). Depression in adults: Treatment and management, recommendations. NICE guideline NG222.