Evidence that informs the work
Research is one part of how Mindful Yogis approaches yoga therapy. It helps us examine what changes, where the limits of the evidence are, and how structured practice may support people over time.
The work below includes Karthikeyan's MSc research on burnout and ongoing programme evaluation from Calm Within Chaos. Both continue to inform how Mindful Yogis structures practice, reviews progress, and adapts programmes over time.
Burnout and online yoga
Karthikeyan's MSc research examined an online yoga programme for adults experiencing burnout in the Netherlands. The study included 60 participants, with 30 taking part in the yoga programme and 30 in a comparison group.
The programme combined movement, breathing, relaxation, meditation, and reflective practices delivered online.
What changed
Among the 30 participants in the yoga group:
Burnout score
Oldenburg Burnout Inventory, down 14.5% on average
Sleep score
Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, down 42.6%; lower is better
Positive outlook
up 29.7% on average
Recorded lower burnout
28 of 30
by the end of the programme
Twenty-eight of the 30 participants recorded lower burnout scores by the end of the programme. The comparison group did not show the same pattern of change over the same period.
How to read these results
This was an MSc research project, not a peer-reviewed clinical trial. The findings describe what changed within this study. They do not mean that every participant will respond in the same way, or that the yoga programme alone caused every change observed.
How this informs Reignite. The research continues to influence the way Reignite is structured: sustained practice over several weeks, attention to sleep and recovery, regular review, and enough time for participants to observe what is and is not proving useful.
Explore Reignite →Evaluating change in anxiety over time
Calm Within Chaos has been evaluated using the same principle of looking at change before and after the programme, rather than relying only on participant impressions. The current complete-case dataset includes 17 participants from three cohorts who completed all four measures used consistently across those cohorts.
The evaluation includes three established anxiety measures:
- GAD-7
- Beck Anxiety Inventory
- Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale
A separate programme measure of positivity was also collected.
What changed
Across the 17 complete cases:
GAD-7
generalised anxiety, down 36.4%; 14 of 17 improved
Beck Anxiety Inventory
down 40.4%; 13 improved, 2 unchanged, 2 higher
Hamilton Anxiety
down 35.9%; 14 of 17 improved
Positivity
programme measure, up 10.1%
Individual responses varied across all four measures.
How to read these results
This is an uncontrolled pre and post programme evaluation. It shows what was observed among people who completed Calm Within Chaos, but it does not establish that the programme caused those changes. The sample is also relatively small, and the results should be understood in that context.
The purpose of collecting these measures is not to turn every participant experience into a number. It is to give us another way of considering whether meaningful change has occurred and where the programme may need to develop.
How this informs Calm Within Chaos. The evaluation reinforces the importance of sustained practice, individual adaptation within a shared group structure, and reviewing anxiety from more than one perspective. It also reminds us that people do not respond in exactly the same way. The programme therefore continues to combine a common eight-week structure with individual consultations and adjustments where needed.
Explore Calm Within Chaos →What the evidence continues to teach us
Research and programme evaluation are useful when they influence how the work is actually done. Several principles have become increasingly important across both programmes.
Practice needs time
A single session can introduce a useful idea or practice. It cannot tell us much about how that practice will function in someone's life. Working over several weeks gives people time to practise, observe, and make adjustments.
Individual responses differ
Average scores can show an overall pattern, but they cannot predict what will happen for one person. This is why the practice still needs to take account of health, capacity, circumstances, and individual experience.
Progress should be reviewed
Starting and closing measures can make changes easier to see, and can sometimes reveal something that general impressions miss. They are one source of information, not the whole picture.
Daily life matters
The purpose is not to become better at performing yoga. What matters is whether the work is proving useful in areas relevant to the person, such as sleep, energy, anxiety, recovery, mobility, emotional steadiness, or managing daily life.
Evidence has limits
Research can inform decisions. It cannot remove uncertainty. I think it is important to be clear about both what the evidence shows and what it does not.
Karthikeyan
I hold an MSc in Yoga from S-VYASA. My research examined burnout and online yoga among adults in the Netherlands. Since then, I have continued to use structured assessment and programme evaluation where it adds something useful to the work.
Research is not separate from practice for me. Its value is in helping me ask better questions, observe change more carefully, and revise what I do when the evidence or the experience of participants suggests that something should change.
More about my background and approach →See how the work is applied
Reignite
An eight-week yoga therapy programme for people experiencing burnout, persistent exhaustion, or difficulty recovering after effort.
Explore Reignite →Calm Within Chaos
An eight-week yoga therapy programme for people experiencing persistent anxiety, worry, restlessness, or overwhelm.
Explore Calm Within Chaos →Start with a conversation
If you are considering yoga therapy but are unsure whether a group programme or individual work is more appropriate, we can look at that together in a free consultation.
Book a Free Consultation