“Follow the Musical Road”: Selecting Appropriate Music Experiences for People with Dementia Living in the Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are many music experiences for people with dementia and their caregivers including but not limited to individualized playlists, music and singing groups, dementia-inclusive choirs and concerts, and music therapy. While the benefits of these music experiences have been well documented, an understanding of the differences between them is often absent. However, knowledge of and distinction between these experiences are crucial to people with dementia and their family members, caregivers, and health practitioners to ensure a comprehensive music approach to dementia care is provided. Considering the array of music experiences available, choosing the most appropriate music experience can be challenging. This is an exploratory phenomenological study with significant Public and Patient Involvement (PPI). Through consultation with PPI contributors with dementia via an online focus group and senior music therapists working in dementia care via online semi-structured interviews, this paper aims to identify these distinctions and to address this challenge by providing a visual step-by-step guide. This guide can be consulted when choosing an appropriate music experience for a person with dementia living in the community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".