Proprioception is crucial for physical activities, motor control, balance, and coordination, yet strategies to enhance it remain debated. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) may improve proprioception by enhancing body awareness through attention regulation and body-mind synergy. MBIs offer low intensity, low cost, and good repeatability. This study hypothesized that MBIs improve proprioception indirectly by enhancing sensory awareness and attention regulation. We used Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis to quantify the effects of MBIs on proprioception from studies over the past two decades. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched six databases for studies published between 2005 and 2025. Bayesian models quantified the effects of MBIs, and moderation analysis explored factors influencing the effect size. We included 22 studies (n = 1397) yielding 112 effect sizes. Following our sign convention, a negative Hedges’ g denoted improved proprioceptive accuracy. The main effect model showed that MBIs improved proprioceptive accuracy (g = −0.70; 95% HDI = [−0.96, −0.44]; BF = 4290.00). Subgroup analysis revealed that Tai Chi had the largest credible effect (g = −0.82), and older adults showed the greatest improvement (g = −0.84). However, a significant multilevel Egger test indicated small-study effects, and the model-averaged bias-corrected interval included zero, so the magnitude of the pooled effect remained uncertain. This meta-analysis indicated that MBIs may improve proprioceptive accuracy, with Tai Chi showing the most consistent evidence, particularly in older adults; however, significant small-study effects and high heterogeneity meant the magnitude is uncertain and may be smaller than the unadjusted estimate suggests. The low-intensity nature of MBIs and their promotion of neuroplasticity through sensory awareness and attention regulation may optimize proprioception, offering insights for neurorehabilitation and integrated rehabilitation programs. Preregistration: PROSPERO CRD420250623894. The extracted data, R analysis code, risk-of-bias assessment workbooks, and supporting materials are publicly available on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/9jqgn/ .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2026 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: