The Role of Reminiscence in Arts-Based Interventions for Dementia Care: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The number of people in Canada living with dementia is predicted to rise to 912,000 by 2030. Traditional treatments for dementia have been unsuccessful in eliminating negative responsive behaviours (wandering, agitation, vocalizations) and prompted the emergence of alternative strategies, such as art and music therapy. Although previous reviews have been conducted on aspects of the arts and older adulthood, such as the efficacy and benefits of creative arts therapies in people with dementia, to our knowledge, no review has specifically focused on the role of reminiscence within arts-based interventions for dementia care. Purpose: This scoping review aims to assess the state of the evidence on the role of reminiscence in visual art interventions for individuals with dementia, intending to map the range, nature, and focus of articles and identify gaps for future work in this context. Methods: The five-stage scoping review framework of Arksey and O’Malley (2005) guided this review. Data Sources: CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Results: 1508 articles were retrieved and screened using pre-established inclusion criteria; 21 empirical articles were retained. Data extracted illustrated themes of social connection, bridging the past and present, and increased enjoyment and confidence. Authors noted art’s positive impact on individuals with dementia. The benefits of reminiscence in arts-based therapy were unanimously observed across diverse studies in our review and point to a call for future research. Conclusion: Reminiscence is a vital component within art interventions that allow for making a human connection. Art fosters communication, helping individuals navigate the challenges of everyday life.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".