Productive art engagement in a hybrid format: effects on emotions of older adults during COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Previous studies have shown benefits of productive art-activity on frail older adults' mental and physical health. In this study, we investigated the effects of art-producing activities in a hybrid format (in-person and online) in a context of lockdown compared with previous studies taking place in museums and their effects on wellbeing, quality of life, physical frailty, and apathy in older adults. Methods We conducted a randomized unicentric control trial on a sample of 126 seniors older than 65 years (mean age 71.9 ± 2.3, 81% women) living in Nice (France). Participants were randomized in two parallel groups (intervention group with n = 62 vs. control group with n = 64) conducted during pandemic, between March and May 2021. The intervention group involved participatory art-based activities conducted in a hybrid format, either in-person or online, once a week for 2 h over a 12-week period. No specific intervention was proposed to the control group. The main aim was to evaluate how this hybrid format would impact the wellbeing, quality of life, and physical frailty of participants. The secondary aim was to compare our results with the previous studies conducted by Beauchet et al., and the third aim was to evaluate the impact of the intervention on apathy. Validated scales were implemented in RedCap and administered at baseline (M0) and at the end of the third month (M3). Results The intervention group showed significant improvement in their quality of life (p = 0.017) and their level of apathy (p = 0.016) after intervention. Emotional blunting increased significantly in the control group (p = 0.016) while it remained stable in the intervention group. No significant improvement was observed on the frailty, and wellbeing scores remained constant in both groups. Conclusion This randomized control trial confirmed emotional effects on seniors practicing an art-based activity in a hybrid format during pandemic on a weekly basis for 3 months. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier: NCT04570813.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".