MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390080315 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igad104.3743

IMPROVING COGNITIVE DECLINE FOR PERSONS LIVING WITH DEMENTIA: A RCT ART THERAPY BASED ON THE ETC FRAMEWORK

2023· article· en· W4390080315 on OpenAlexaff
Heesu J. Jeon

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsAdler
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)Psychological interventionCognitionPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Art therapyClinical psychologyGerontologyMedicinePsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract This randomized controlled trial explored the impact of Expressive Therapies Continuum (ETC)-based art therapy interventions for older adults with dementia living in a complex care home. The trial examined the efficacy of 10 art therapy intervention sessions over 4 months, comparing results with an active control group that participated in 10 art sessions. Pre- and post-assessments, including the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Clock Drawing Test (CDT), and the Older People’s Quality of Life (OPQOL-Brief) questionnaires, were conducted. Results demonstrated that participants displayed similar visual expression elements, shared preferences for specific media types, and equivalent ETC-based intervention entry levels. In addition, participants in the experimental group showed significant increases in OPQOL-Brief scores. Finally, MMSE-Language scores demonstrated statistically significant increases in the experimental group and a decrease in the control group. The current study aligns with previous research demonstrating that art therapy can improve cognitive functioning and enhance the quality of life in older adults living with dementia. It expands on previous research by providing new insights into expressive and stylistic elements, ETC entry-level, and media preferences for engaging in artmaking. Keywords: Art therapy, dementia, older adults, Expressive Therapies Continuum, cognitive functioning, quality of life

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicArt Therapy and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207