Impact of the ‘Artful Moments’ Intervention on Persons with Dementia and Their Care Partners: a Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Engaging with art can be valuable for persons living with dementia. 'Artful Moments' was a collaborative project undertaken by the Art Gallery of Hamilton and the Behavioural Health Program at Hamilton Health Sciences that sought to develop and implement a program of arts-based activities for persons in the middle-to-late stages of dementia who exhibit behavioural symptoms and for their accompanying care partners. METHODS: This pilot study employed a qualitative descriptive design. Eight participants were observed during multiple art sessions to evaluate their level of engagement in the program. Care partners also completed a questionnaire describing their experience. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify themes. RESULTS: For program participants, factors that promoted continued interest and engagement in art included: care partner involvement, group activities, opportunities to share opinions, validation of their personhood, and increased engagement over time. Care partners observed improvements in participants' creativity, communication, relationship forming, and task accomplishment, and some reported reduced stress. CONCLUSIONS: 'Artful Moments' promoted engagement and expression in persons in the middle-to-late stages of dementia, as well as having benefits for their care partners. Limitations of the study included a small convenience sample drawn from one hospital setting.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".