Towards an Empirically Informed Theory of Action of the Art-based Mental Health Rehabilitation Program All on Stage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite increasing evidence supporting the efficacy of art-based programs for mental health rehabilitation, the active ingredients and therapeutic processes of these interventions are still poorly understood. In the present study, our objective was to empirically derive the theory of action of the program All on Stage, an innovative art-based rehabilitation program for youths with stabilized mental disorders. We conducted individual and group semi-structured interviews with twenty-four participants at post-program and three-month follow up. At post-program, we similarly interviewed the artists and psychoeducator who facilitated the program and the clinicians who referred participants to it. We also collected field observations throughout the program using a participatory approach. We performed qualitative thematic analyses on all relevant material. Analyses revealed four mechanisms that seem to be at work in the program: 1) social experience and gratification, 2) desensitization by gradual exposure, 3) success and valorization, and 4) normalization. The emergence or impact of these mechanisms appeared to be favored by various program characteristics, including the non-clinical setting and facilitation of the program, the heterogeneous composition of the groups, the use of performing arts, and the pursuit of a collectively achieved artistic product and its sharing with an external public. Our study offers a rare example of inductive theory building in the context of a real-world program evaluation. Study conclusions can guide the planning and delivery of future initiatives in the fields of youth mental health and arts in health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".