Effect of Live Environmental Music Therapy and Prerecorded Music on State Anxiety, Stress, Pain, and Well-Being Levels of Patients and Caregivers in the Emergency Department Waiting Room: Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients and caregivers attending emergency units often experience elevated levels of stress and anxiety. Music has been used in waiting rooms to reduce stress and anxiety, but existing studies on music therapy in emergency unit waiting areas are scarce and have limitations such as low statistical power and limited music selection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the effect of live Environmental Music Therapy and prerecorded music on state anxiety, stress, pain, and well-being levels in patients and caregivers in the emergency unit waiting areas of 2 hospitals in Colombia. METHODS: This study is a multicenter randomized clinical trial, with 3 arms: standard care + live Environmental Music Therapy, standard care + prerecorded music, and standard care only. The primary outcome measure is the 6-item State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6). Secondary outcome measures are pain and stress levels, both measured with Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), and well-being, measured with the Well-Being Numerical Rating Scales (WB-NRSs). The scales will be applied before and after each intervention. A total of 246 patients (82 in each arm) and 147 caregivers (49 in each arm) will be randomized. RESULTS: Data collection for this study started on September 3, 2024, and as of the submission of the study (November 2024), 216 patients and 134 caregivers have been enrolled. It is expected that the results will be available by May 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This study seeks to contribute to improving the mental health, well-being, and quality of care of patients and caregivers in the waiting area of the emergency units. This is the first study in Colombia investigating the effect of live music therapy and prerecorded music interventions in the emergency department. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06510153; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06510153. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/69131.
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 | 0.021 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.005 |
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".