An Investigation Comparing the Effectiveness of a Live Music Therapy Session and Recorded Music in Reducing Anxiety for Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis / Motor Neurone Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research project was to compare the effectiveness of a live music therapy session, recorded music, and silence, in reducing anxiety for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) / motor neurone disease (MND). Twenty-one participants with ALS/MND were recruited from an inpatient hospice service. The study implemented a repeated measures design, with participants acting as their own controls. Participants experienced each of the three conditions mentioned above, over a period of one week. A pretest-posttest design was used and participants completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (Zigmond and Snaith, 1983) and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) (Bruera, Kuehn, Miller, Selmser and Macmillan, 1991) immediately before and after the intervention. Heart rate and oxygen saturation levels were also measured pre and post. Results of the study were not significant in either the music therapy or recorded music groups. The majority of participants (81%) reported little or no anxiety prior to the interventions, and therefore, little change was noted in any of the groups. Limitations of the study included patients' not experiencing significant anxiety, study design and difficulty with recruitment and attrition rates. The authors recommend further studies to determine the need for anxiety management and also surveying patients as to their needs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".