Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Children and Adolescents with ADHD: A Bayesian Meta-Analysis (Liu et al., 2026)
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, is among the most common neurodevelopmental conditions of childhood, and medication is usually the first treatment offered. Families and clinicians have therefore looked for complementary options, and mindfulness training, which teaches children to notice their attention and impulses before reacting to them, has become a popular candidate. Yiran Liu, Qiang Yan and colleagues pooled the evidence from randomized trials in a new Bayesian meta-analysis published in Frontiers in Psychology. A Bayesian approach expresses uncertainty as a range of plausible values rather than a single yes-or-no verdict.
The team registered their protocol in advance and searched seven databases for trials published through April 2025. Seventeen randomized trials, involving almost 3,000 children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 with ADHD, qualified. Nearly all tested mindfulness programs, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction or cognitive therapy adapted for young people, and some involved parents alongside their children. The typical program ran for about eight weeks. The comparison group was most often a wait-list, although some trials used psychoeducation, cognitive behavioral therapy or other active alternatives.
Across outcomes, mindfulness showed a moderate benefit over the comparison conditions. The clearest gains were in overall ADHD ratings and in hyperactivity and impulsivity, with smaller improvements in inattention, task performance and executive functions such as planning and self-control. For emotion regulation the estimate was too uncertain to draw a conclusion. Importantly, programs with more total contact time tended to show larger effects, and benefits for hyperactivity and impulsivity appeared after roughly seven to eight hours of training. Because this comes from comparing different trials rather than testing doses directly, it is a pattern to explore, not a prescription.
The authors are candid about the weaknesses. Most outcomes were symptom ratings made by people who knew who had received the program, and about a third of the trials were judged at high risk of bias for this reason. Statistical checks suggested that small studies with large effects may be over-represented, so the true benefit could be smaller than the pooled figure. Results also varied considerably from one trial to the next, nearly all trials measured outcomes only straight after the program, and only English-language studies were included, so it is unclear how long any gains last.
For families, the review supports mindfulness as a possible complement to established treatments, not a replacement for them. Future trials will need blinded assessments, longer follow-up and clearer reporting of medication use and program content to show which children benefit most.
Reference and link: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1711994
