Exploring uses of visual arts-based interventions for mental health of marginalized populations: a scoping review
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
BACKGROUND: The intentions of this scoping review are to determine current uses of visual arts-based interventions for mental health and trauma support of marginalized populations, and to identify current gaps in knowledge in this emergent field. METHOD: Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, JSTOR) were searched for relevant studies. Following the PRISMA guidelines, 38 articles met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Most interventions focused on improving the mental health of participants, or to provide opportunities for participants to process their experiences of mental health. Participants reported increased well-being, experiences of relaxation and/or distraction, and processing of mental health experiences. They perceived arts-based interventions as helpful and developed mutual social support with other participants. CONCLUSION: Arts-based interventions have the potential to inform the development of culturally safe and relevant mental health care for marginalized populations beyond current mainstream mental health practices.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it