Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36846482›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

An updated classification of meditation methods using principles of taxonomy and systematics.

Jonathan D Nash, Andrew B Newberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jonathan D NashRetired, Unaffiliated, Chiangmai, Thailand.
Andrew B NewbergDepartment of Integrative Medicine and Nutritional Sciences, Jefferson University Hospitals, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper revisits the proposal for the classification of meditation methods which we introduced in our initial 2013 publication, "Toward a Universal Taxonomy and Definition of Meditation". At that time, we advanced the thesis that meditation methods could be effectively segregated into three orthogonal categories by integrating the taxonomic principle of functional essentialism and the paradigm of Affect and Cognition; and we presented relevant research findings which supported that assertion. This iteration expands upon those theoretical and methodological elements by articulating a more comprehensive Three Tier Classification System which accounts for the full range of meditation methods; and demonstrates how recent neuroscience research continues to validate and support our thesis. This paper also introduces a novel criterion-based protocol for formulating classification systems of meditation methods, and demonstrates how this model can be used to compare and evaluate various other taxonomy proposals that have been published over the past 15 years.

Indexed as

cognition and affectconsciousnesscontemplative neurosciencecontemplative traditionsmeditationneurobiologyneurophysiologytaxonomy and classification

Identifiers

PMID36846482
PMCPMC9945223

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.