A personal reflection on challenges facing music therapy education, training and clinical practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music used in connection with health and wellness is not a new concept. Music therapy is one discipline that uses music and has developed at various speeds internationally. Since the day I first learned about music therapy I have been advocating further understanding of the discipline, and for its inclusion in multiple contexts. I situate myself in the paper with the start of my own journey into music therapy and provide a short personal reflective overview of three overarching issues I see impacting education, training, and clinical practice of music therapy and its continued development. The World Federation of Music Therapy and the International Association for Music and Medicine will be briefly described with respect to their impact as two large international organizations seeking to advance music therapy and music medicine in healthcare. The essay is offered as an opportunity for educators, practitioners, and researchers to consider and reflect on the factors they see impacting our profession to work towards advancing music therapy and actioning the challenges facing the discipline. Some action steps are offered such as ensuring ethical practice, continuing advocacy efforts, increasing opportunities and avenues of knowledge translation, and developing collaborations. It is hoped that reflecting on these experiences will further dialogue to advance different, non-Western perspectives of music therapy, and to learn how to honor multiple ways of supporting therapeutic music and healing experiences without centering Western approaches or perspectives.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it