MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557627560 · doi:10.1186/s40814-016-0111-x

Evaluation of the effectiveness of music therapy in improving the quality of life of palliative care patients: a randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study

2016· article· en· W2557627560 on OpenAlex
Tracey McConnell, Lisa Graham‐Wisener, Joan Regan, Miriam McKeown, Jenny Kirkwood, Naomi Hughes, Mike Clarke, Janet Leitch, Kerry McGrillen, Sam Porter

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPublic Health Agency
KeywordsMusic therapyMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Palliative careAttritionIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialPhysical therapyTest (biology)Informed consentData collectionFamily medicineNursingAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Music therapy is frequently used as a palliative therapy. In consonance with the goals of palliative care, the primary aim of music therapy is to improve people's quality of life by addressing their psychological needs and facilitating communication. To date, primarily because of a paucity of robust research, the evidence for music therapy's effectiveness on patient reported outcomes is positive but weak. This pilot and feasibility study will test procedures, outcomes and validated tools; estimate recruitment and attrition rates; and calculate the sample size required for a phase III randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of music therapy in improving the quality of life of palliative care patients. METHODS: A pilot randomised controlled trial supplemented with qualitative methods. The quantitative data collection will involve recruitment of >52 patients from an inpatient Marie Curie hospice setting over a 12-month period. Eligibility criteria include all patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 03- indicating they are medically fit to engage with music therapy and an Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) score of ≥7 indicating they are capable of providing meaningful informed consent and accurate responses to outcome measures. Baseline data collection will include the McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire (MQOL); medical and socio-demographic data will be undertaken before randomisation to an intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention arm will be offered two 30-45 min sessions of music therapy per week for three consecutive weeks, in addition to care as usual. Participants in the control arm will receive care as usual. Follow-up measures will be administered in 1, 3 and 5 weeks. Qualitative data collection will involve focus group and individual interviews with HCPs and carers. DISCUSSION: This study will ensure a firm methodological grounding for the development of a robust phase III randomised trial of music therapy for improving quality of life in palliative care patients. By undertaking the pilot and feasibility trial under normal clinical conditions in a hospice setting, the trial will result in reliable procedures to overcome some of the difficulties in designing music therapy RCTs for palliative care settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02791048.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.343
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.126 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it