MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391606462 · doi:10.2196/52497

An Individual Music Intervention for Adults With Intellectual Disabilities and Challenging Behavior: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4391606462 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gerianne Smeets, Karin M. Volkers, Erik Scherder, Xavier Moonen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Protocol (science)PsychologyIntellectual disabilityApplied psychologyClinical psychologyMedical educationMedicineAlternative medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) are more likely to have problems with executive functioning (EF) and challenging behavior (CB), which are negatively linked to well-being. Among clinical populations, music interventions have been shown to improve various outcome measures, such as CB and EF. Until now, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to examine the effectiveness of an individual music intervention for adults with ID and CB. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to identify the effect and feasibility of an individual music intervention compared with care-as-usual for people with ID and CB. METHODS: In this study, a 2-group RCT with a pretest, posttest, and follow-up assessment after 8 weeks is presented. Participants of the music intervention condition will receive 16 individual music sessions within 8 to 10 weeks. The music intervention will be guided by a manual for music workers, in which every session will have a different focus (introduction, emotions, different EF, and end performance). Participants receiving care as usual will function as a control group. After the research is finished, they will be offered a budget, which they can spend on musical activities or musical instruments as they wish. Assessments will include caregiver rating scales and self-report questionnaires and tests, which will assess outcome measures of CB, well-being, depression, anxiety, self-esteem, and 4 domains of EF. A process evaluation will be conducted after the completion of the study, which entails the analysis of data on multiple aspects of the intervention and the study overall. RESULTS: Enrollment commenced in July 2021, and data collection ended in May 2023. A total of 97 participants were recruited, with 44 participants allocated to the intervention group and 53 allocated to the control group. Data will be analyzed after this protocol has been accepted for publication. CONCLUSIONS: Because there are currently no published RCTs of an individual music intervention for adults with ID and CB, this study will provide insight into the effectiveness and experiences of an individual music intervention for this target group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform NL8482; http://tinyurl.com/4565s5pd. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52497.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.007
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.013

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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.602
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicMusic Therapy and HealthFrench-language works237,207