Artful Moments: A framework for successful engagement in an arts-based programme for persons in the middle to late stages of dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Art galleries are becoming more inclusive in their activities for those with specific needs. The interdisciplinary team on an inpatient behavioural health unit collaborated with artist-educators at the Art Gallery of Hamilton (Ontario, Canada) to create an arts-based programme. ‘Artful Moments’ involved using a combination of art appreciation and hands-on art making activities and took place on the unit at the hospital and at the art gallery. A pilot study of eight participants and their care partners who attended the programme is presented. The purpose of the study was to determine if ‘Artful Moments’ facilitated positive engagement ‘in the moment’ for persons in the middle-to-late stages of dementia. The perception of the programme’s impact from their care partners’ perspectives, as well as their satisfaction with the programme is also reported. Extensive education of art gallery staff and clinical staff preceded the programming, with each team sharing expertise with the other. Sessions (n = 27) took place about twice per month. Data were collected through systematic structured observations of patient participants during the activities and through surveys of care partners. Persons with dementia maintained interest, though not necessarily pleasure, during art appreciation and art making, rarely became sad or anxious, and never became angry. Generally the care partners felt that participants enjoyed the experience, and often they were surprised by the very positive response of the participants. Successful engagement was attributed to a dementia-friendly environment; supportive communication strategies; and a suitable, well-planned activity.
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 | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".