MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407029039 · doi:10.1080/07421656.2024.2418153

Museum-Based Art Therapy Program in the Chronic Phase of Stroke: A Feasibility Pilot Study

2025· article· en· W4407029039 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArt Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRéseau québécois de recherche sur le vieillissement
KeywordsArt therapyStroke (engine)MedicinePsychologyPsychotherapistPhysical therapyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This pilot study evaluated feasibility (retention/adherence) of a 7-visit museum-based art therapy intervention (1-hour guided artworks visit followed by a 2-hour workshop), for 7 chronic stroke survivors and investigated its impact on their psychosocial well-being (depression/self-esteem/body image/community integration). Pre/post-intervention, questionnaires were used to assess the psychological variables and post-intervention, semi-structured individual interviews and a focus group were conducted. The findings showed that the intervention was feasible, with a retention of 77% and adherence of 84%. Participants reported positive effects of the intervention on psychosocial variables such as self-esteem and mood but less so on body image. Clinical implications include initial evidence of the feasibility and potential benefits of a museum-based art therapy intervention in improving post-stroke psychosocial well-being.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.260 · 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