ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Neurophysiological mechanisms of focused attention meditation: A scoping systematic review.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Load-Dependent Modulation of Cognitive Control Following OM Meditation: Time-Resolved EEG Evidence from the N2 Component.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2026Article
- Microstate Dynamics of Focused Attention Meditation.Brain topography · 2026Article
- Neural dynamics of mindfulness training: A longitudinal EEG network analysis of focused attention and open monitoring meditation.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Meditation-Specific Neural Predictors of State Mindfulness During Eyes Open Meditation.Mindfulness · 2026Article
- Reimagining pain as an allostatic imperative: perspectives from contemplative traditions.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2025Article
- Meditation induces shifts in neural oscillations, brain complexity, and critical dynamics: novel insights from MEG.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Focused attention meditation (FA) is a foundational and widely studied practice that cultivates sustained concentration by focusing on a specific object, such as the breath, while disengaging from distractions. Numerous studies have investigated the neurophysiological mechanisms of FA, examining aspects such as spectral power, connectivity patterns, and neural entropy. However, despite this extensive research, clarity regarding the methodological approaches and key findings in this field remains limited. This scoping systematic review aimed to collate and interpret key information from electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) studies on FA, with a focus on study population composition, experimental design, and neurophysiological outcomes. Our findings revealed substantial heterogeneity in participant characteristics, potentially contributing to variability in neurophysiological results, while the choice of FA tasks and control conditions was relatively consistent. In terms of neurophysiological outcomes, consistent trends indicate that FA is associated with increased power in the alpha, beta, and gamma bandwidths, as well as heightened complexity and reduced criticality measures. Based on the findings of this review, we propose several methodological recommendations to improve the quality of future research. Additionally, we identified significant evidence gaps when considering the whole body of research, including the limited use of MEG and a lack of longitudinal studies, pointing to areas for future investigation. Overall, this review provides a firm grounding for the study of the neurophysiology of FA, as well as the study of advanced meditation and neuroscience-informed meditative development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.