Arts and mental health: assessment of changes in self-reported wellbeing, psychotic-like experiences, mentalisation and self-efficacy for persons with schizophrenia spectrum disorders participating in the creative writing group intervention REWRITALIZE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) are associated with social difficulties that call for psychosocial interventions as supplement to standard treatment. The aim of the present study was to assess if there were changes in wellbeing, psychotic-like experiences, mentalisation and self-efficacy from pre- to post-intervention, in persons with SSD who took part in a creative writing group intervention in addition to their standard treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: = 73 with SSD) self-reported their level of wellbeing (Patient-reported outcome measures; PROMs), psychotic-like experiences (Inventory of psychotic-like anomalous self-experiences; IPASE), mentalisation (Reflective functioning questionnaire; RFQ and Toronto Alexithymia Scale; TAS), and self-efficacy (General self-efficacy scale; GSE) before and after REWRITALIZE, a creative writing group intervention led by a professional author in which participants were introduced to literary forms, wrote spontaneously on those forms, and engaged in literary conversation about their texts. RESULTS: There was a significant difference from pre- to post-intervention in psychotic-like experiences (IPASE), ability to understand one's own reasons and feelings (TAS), and self-efficacy (GSE). CONCLUSION: Although the study was uncontrolled, these results suggest that REWRITALIZE as supplement to standard treatment may be beneficial to persons with SSD.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".