| Title |
Understanding the impact of visual arts interventions for people living with dementia: a realist review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-3-91 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gill Windle, Samantha Gregory, Andrew Newman, Anna Goulding, Dave O'Brien, Clive Parkinson |
| Abstract |
Arts-based activities are being increasingly suggested as a valuable activity for people living with dementia in terms of countering the negative aspects of their condition. The potential for such programmes to improve a broad range of psychosocial outcomes is suggested in some studies. However, there is largely an absence of rigorous methodology to demonstrate the benefits, and research results are mixed. Practice variability in terms of the content, contexts and implementation of such interventions raises challenges in terms of identifying an optimal arts programme model that could be adopted by other service providers. Understanding how interventions may have the best chance at broad implementation success and uptake is limited.Methods/design: A realist review will be undertaken. This aims to understand how visual arts interventions influence outcomes in people living with dementia. The review will explore how the context, that is the circumstances which enable or constrain, affect outcomes through the activation of mechanisms. An early scoping search and a stakeholder survey formulated the preliminary programme theory. A systematic literature search across a broad range of disciplines (arts, humanities, social sciences, health) will be undertaken to identify journal articles and grey literature. Data will be extracted in relation to the programme theory, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes and their configurations, background information about the study design and participant characteristics, detail about the quantity ('dose') of an intervention, theoretical perspectives proposed by the authors of the paper and further theorising by the reviewer. Thematic connections/patterns will be sought across the extracted data, identifying patterns amongst contextual factors, the mechanisms they trigger and the associated outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 61% |
| Estonia | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 72% |
| Scientists | 3 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 23% |
| Researcher | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 23% |
| Unknown | 13 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 19 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 16% |
| Arts and Humanities | 12 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2014.
All research outputs
#2,316,425
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#412
of 1,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,966
of 230,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#9
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.