MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088796280 · doi:10.1177/0733464820967195

Accessible Virtual Arts Recreation for Wellbeing Promotion in Long-Term Care Residents

2020· article· en· W3088796280 on OpenAlexafffund
Kelly J. Murphy, Swathi Swaminathan, Elizabeth Howard, Aviva Altschuler, Jessica Rogan, Olivier Beauchet, Kate Dupuis, Liisa A.M. Galea, David B. Hogan, Navena R. Lingum, Gillian Rowe, Lia Tsotsos, Ala Szczepura, Walter Wittich, Feng Xie, Lynn Hasher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Gerontology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationSheridan CollegeUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCentre for Aging + Brain Health Innovation
KeywordsMoodPsychological interventionRecreationOpenness to experiencePsychologyGerontologyThe artsPromotion (chess)MedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficacy of a technology-driven visual arts recreation activity, delivered virtually, was evaluated for its potential to achieve positive impacts, similar to traditional arts-interventions, on wellbeing in long-term care residents. Thirty-one residents (average age 86.8 years; SD = 9.4) engaged with the arts-intervention for 30-minutes, twice weekly, for 6 weeks with either a partner or as part of a group. Wellbeing indicators included self-reported psychological and health-related wellness, and attention capacity. Binomial tests of postintervention change revealed a significant above-chance probability of improvement in one or more wellbeing indicators ( p < .05). Postparticipation feedback survey scores were positive ( p < .05). Cognitive status did not influence outcome; however, other participant characteristics such as younger age, higher openness-to-experience (personality trait), and lower baseline mood were significantly associated with positive response to the intervention ( p < .05). Findings demonstrate technology may be an effective platform for promoting accessibility to beneficial arts-interventions for older adults.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied GerontologySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207