The MusiQual treatment manual for music therapy in a palliative care inpatient setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents the treatment manual developed during the MusiQual feasibility study carried out in Belfast by Queen’s University Belfast, Every Day Harmony Music Therapy, and Marie Curie Northern Ireland. The MusiQual study considered the feasibility of a multicentre randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of music therapy in improving the quality of life of hospice inpatients (protocol: McConnell et al. results: Porter et al.). The procedures in the manual are based fully on those implemented by the Music Therapists during the feasibility study, and it also incorporates the theoretical model defined and published following the realist review of the literature (McConnell and Porter). The manual is presented in the format in which it would be used in the potential future phase III multicentre randomised control trial. It represents a flexible approach to provide enough scope for practicing therapists to adapt their interventions to individual clients as is best practice in music therapy. It aims to provide stable guidelines both to ensure treatment fidelity in a future trial of music therapy for palliative care inpatients and to act as a relevant guide for Music Therapists practicing in this field.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.008 |
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".