Research Trends in Mindfulness for Adolescents: Based on CiteSpace Visualization Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mindfulness has been increasingly used to improve the mental health of adolescents. This study focused on evaluating the latest research status of mindfulness for adolescents through CiteSpace and on identifying research hotspots and frontiers. We extracted the English literature of mindfulness for adolescents from the Web of Science (WoS) and the Chinese literature from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases, covering the period from 1999 to 2022. A total of 1317 papers were obtained. CiteSpace was used to generate online maps of worldwide cooperation among countries, institutions, and authors. Hotspots and frontiers were systematically summarized. There is a paucity of collaboration among institutions in the Chinese literature compared to the English literature. The research themes of the literatures of the two languages have overlaps and also discrepancies at different times. Future research may focus on the mechanism of mindfulness and appropriate groups for application. Collaboration among authors should be strengthened.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it