The cancer journey: Bridging art therapy and museum education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the application of art therapy in assisting cancer patients to visually express their cancer experience on several levels--physically, psychosocially, and spiritually. The art therapy/museum education program was developed in 1996 at the McMichael Canadian Art Collection in partnership with Toronto-Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre-Bayview Support Network. To date, the program has run for three rounds with 16 sessions in each round. The facilitator for all three rounds was a trained art therapist. The program provided an unique opportunity for an arts institution to serve the community at large by offering an artistic outlet in a peaceful, rural setting in contrast to a sterile hospital environment. The specific goals of the program and the general therapeutic benefits of art therapy are described. In addition, the effectiveness of an existential/phenomenological approach in not only serving the cancer population, but also bridging the two diverse disciplines--art therapy and museum education--is explored. It is suggested that an existential therapeutic approach promotes the confrontation and acceptance of death that is necessary in order to lead a more meaningful life. Moreover, a phenomenological approach promotes the act of "seeing" as an essential ingredient in gaining objectivity and bringing unconscious thoughts into consciousness. The importance of social and emotional support in the way of art therapy in addition to medical care is emphasized. Through art therapy, cancer patients are encouraged to discover ways to face pain and misfortune and be creative in their "art of living."
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".