Community Mental Health Music Therapy: A Consumer-Initiated Song-Based paradigm/La Musicothérapie En Santé Mentale Communautaire: Un Paradigme Basé Sur Des Chansons Où le Client Est Participatif
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTIONIn Canada, many of our music therapy colleagues teach and practise what used to be called a client-centered eclectic of music therapy. Therapists using this pick and choose from all available historic and current professional music therapy practices and specifically redesign the experiences, within the parameters of the health care service delivery system in Canada, to best meet the needs of the population served. Music therapy practice in Canada has always included both and community models of practice that are informed by the presenting needs of the population and the site served.In 2000 Baines published an article, consumer directed and partnered community mental health music therapy program: Program development and evaluation, in which she described consumer perceptions of a music therapy program based on feedback provided in survey data. The article was published in the Canadian Journal for Music Therapy andwas reprinted in Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy in 2003. This article is also known to have been cited in four recent publications - in an article by Cynthia Chhina (2004) in the Canadian Journal of Music Therapy (Music therapy and psychosocial rehabilitation: Towards a person-centered music therapy model); in a book edited by Susan Hadley (2006), Feminist Perspectives in Music Therapy, in an article by Jane Edwards and Susan Hadley (2007) in The Arts in Psychotherapy (Expanding music therapy practice: Incorporating the feminist frame); and in an article by Barbara Wheeler (2007) in the Canadian Journal of Music Therapy (Music therapy research: Contributions from Canada).Having run now for 11 and 1/2 years, the program described by Baines has had a very long history, especially considering these times of ongoing fiscal restraint. Because of this history and recent interest, the current article revisits this topic, examining the process and effect of singing familiar songs in a participant-driven space with consumers with major mental illness, psychosis, or both. First, relevant literature will be reviewed and then reports on consumer and staff feedback, collected through questionnaires in spring 2008, will be presented. Added to the survey data will be interview data from five consumers of the program.LITERATURE REVIEWFour related areas of study are explored in this literature review: First, recent literature in the community music therapy field is reviewed. Then a review of related music therapy literature is presented. Next, a review of music therapy process for groups - specifically groups of people experiencing major mental illness - is examined. Finally, psychology literature that addresses data relevant to this project is explored; specifically, information on the efficacy of cons um er- drive ? and self-help groups highlighting effective leadership strategies is described.Recent Literature in the Community Music Therapy FieldIn the past, the vast majority of authors on the subject of community music therapy, including Baines (2000), start by apologizing for and then describing clinical music therapy roots, that which has recently been termed the model (Pavlicevic & Ans dell, 2004). This consensus of music therapy is rooted in elements of the English approach pioneered by such eminent music therapy pioneers as Nordoff and Robbins, Mary Priestly, and Juliette Alvin. Today, much of the earlier use of pre-composed music in this has disappeared, leaving an approach based predominantly on improvisation. In Community Music Therapy, a recent book edited by Mercedes Pavlicevic and Gary Ansell (2004), 13 of the invited 17 writers hail from this tradition, regrettably limiting the scope of community music therapy practice described. However, as one of the more seasoned English authors, Leslie Blunt, reflects, Composing songs together with a day patient... or arranging pre-composed music for a group of children. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,024 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».