Early creative dance education: a bibliometric review with knowledge mapping analysis / <i>Educación temprana en danza creativa: una revisión bibliométrica con análisis de mapas de conocimiento</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is based on 410 relevant literature pieces on early creative dance education (ECDE) from 2006 to 2022, as indexed in the Web of Science database. It utilizes CiteSpace 6.1R6 and SCImago Graphica to visualize development trends, key countries, institutions and themes. The results indicate rapid development in ECDE since 2017, with consistent knowledge flow. The primary producers of ECDE research are the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Australia, Spain and Canada. Core institutions consist of research universities, forming four collaborative clusters. Themes such as computational thinking, conservation, mobility, influence and physical literacy reflect current research frontiers in this field. Additionally, the study predicts future trends in ECDE research to include early STEAM education, interdisciplinary learning, interactive technologies, connections with therapy, cognitive development and social engagement.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.141 | 0.143 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".