A Review of the Effectiveness, Feasibility, and Acceptability of Art Therapy for Children and Adolescents during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Art therapy has been widely offered to reduce symptoms of psychological disturbance. Pooled evidence about its effectiveness in epidemic contexts, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, has not been yet established. This study reviewed the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of art therapy on children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic and past epidemics. We searched PubMed/Medline, PsycINFO, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), and CINAHL for articles on art therapy during COVID-19. Included studies reported improvements in measures of mental health, sleep quality, and psychological well-being in children with or without disabilities in the epidemic context. Results also showed that art therapy was highly feasible and accepted by children and adolescents as well as their families during epidemics in reviewed studies. Art therapy can be effective at improving various aspects of mental health, sleep quality, and psychological well-being. More empirical evidence is needed with larger sample sizes and longer duration of interventions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".