MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073048836 · doi:10.1080/08854720903451055

Support from Neurobiology for Spiritual Techniques for Anxiety: A Brief Review

2010· review· en· W2073048836 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Care Chaplaincy · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeditationPsychologyMindfulnessAnxietyAmygdalaPsychotherapistWorryNeurosciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research in neurobiology supports use of spiritual techniques as a beneficial treatment for anxiety. Psychotherapy, including mindfulness CBT and meditation, has been shown to change brain structure. The amygdala-the brain structure responsible for processing emotion and anxiety-demonstrates plasticity, and the purpose of therapy may be to allow the cortex to establish more effective and efficient synaptic links with the amygdala. A main feature of spiritual approaches is changing one's focus of attention. Instead of worry, one focuses on peaceful thoughts, thoughts of helping others, etc. Research demonstrates that thought, meditation, and other manifestations of mind can alter the brain, sometimes in an enduring way. Few studies have addressed the neurobiological underpinnings of meditation. Limited evidence, however, suggests that brain changes occur during prolonged meditation and that meditation activates neural structures involved in attention and control of the autonomic nervous system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it