Petrovic · Journal of medical Internet research 2025 · randomized controlled trial · n=227

Web-Based Formal Versus Informal Mindfulness Programs for University Students With and Those Without Recent Self-Injury: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Level 2 - randomized trial

Individual randomized controlled trial

PubMed 41313154 · doi:10.2196/70011 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

University students with (n=127) and without (n=100) past-year nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) were randomized to a 4-week web-based formal mindfulness (FM) program, an informal mindfulness (IM) program (both consisting of 1-hour weekly group sessions on Webex), or an inactive control group. Outcomes including dispositional mindfulness, well-being, perceived stress, psychological need satisfaction, emotion regulation styles, academic engagement, and program acceptability were assessed at baseline, 1 week post-program, and 1 month post-program.

What was found

Outcomes did not differ as a function of NSSI history. Both FM and IM conditions showed statistically significant improvements compared to the inactive control in overall dispositional mindfulness (P < .001, ηp² = 0.07), nonjudging (P = .03, ηp² = 0.04), describing (P = .007, ηp² = 0.05), well-being (P = .04, ηp² = 0.03), and psychological need satisfaction (P = .005, ηp² = 0.05) immediately after the program, which were sustained at 1-month follow-up. Neither program significantly improved observing, nonreacting, awareness, perceived stress, emotion regulation styles, or academic engagement (all P > .05). Both programs showed high acceptability, with a significant preference for IM immediately post-program (P = .03, ηp² = 0.03).

Why it matters

This study shows that both formal and informal online mindfulness programs are feasible, acceptable, and moderately effective for university students, including those with a history of self-injury. It suggests informal mindfulness may serve as an equally effective and slightly preferred alternative to formal practice.

Limits

The study used an inactive control group rather than an active comparator, limiting control for non-specific effects. Follow-up was short (1 month). The sample was restricted to university students, outcomes relied entirely on self-report measures, and key target outcomes including perceived stress and emotion regulation styles failed to show significant improvement.

Cited by